Skip to main content

Full text of "Weather modification: programs, problems, policy, and potential"

See other formats


952d  affi"  }  COMMITTEE  PRINT 


WEATHER  MODIFICATION: 
PROGRAMS,  PROBLEMS,  POLICY,  AND 
POTENTIAL 


Prepared  at  the  Keqtiest  of 
Hon.  Howard  W.  Cannon,  Chairman 
COMMITTEE  ON  COMMERCE, 
SCIENCE,  AND  TRANSPORTATION 
UNITED  STATES  SENATE 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the 
Committee  on  Commerce,  Science,  and  Transportation 

r 


95S  Congress  I  COMMITTEE  PRINT 

2d  Session  J 


WEATHER  MODIFICATION: 

PROGRAMS,  PROBLEMS,  POLICY,  AND 
POTENTIAL 


Prepared  at  the  Request  of 

Hox.  Howard  W.  Cannon,  Chairman 

COMMITTEE  ON  COMMERCE, 
SCIENCE,  AND  TRANSPORTATION 
UNITED  STATES  SENATE 


MAY  1978 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the 
Committee  on  Commerce,  Science,  and  Transportation 


U.S.  government  printing  office 

34-857  WASHINGTON  :  1978 


COMMITTEE  ON  COMMERCE,  SCIENCE,  AND  TRANSPORTATION 


HOWARD  W.  CANNON,  Nevada,  Chairman 


WARREN  G.  MAGNUSON,  Washington 
RUSSELL  B.  LONG,  Louisiana 
ERNEST  F.  HOLLINGS,  South  Carolina 
DANIEL  K.  INOUYE,  Hawaii 
ADLAI  E.  STEVENSON,  Illinois 
WENDELL  H.  FORD,  Kentucky 
JOHN  A.  DURKIN,  New  Hampshire 
EDWARD  ZORINSKY,  Nebraska 
DONALD  W.  RIEGLE,  Jr.,  Michigan 

Aubrey  L.  Sarvis,  Staff  Director  and  Chief  Counsel 

Edwin  K.  Hall,  General  Counsel 
Malcolm  M.  B.  Sterrett,  Minority  Staff  Director 


JAMES  B.  PEARSON,  Kansas 
ROBERT  P.  GRIFFIN,  Michigan 
TED  STEVENS,  Alaska 
BARRY  GOLDWATER,  Arizona 
BOB  PACKWOOD,  Oregon 
HARRISON  H.  SCHMITT,  New  Mexico 
JOHN  C.  DANFORTH,  Missouri 


LETTER  OF  TRANSMITTAL 


U.S.  Senate, 

Committee  on  Commerce,  Science,  and  Transportation, 

November  15, 1978. 
To  the  members  of  the  Committee  on  Commerce.  Science,  and 
Transportation,  U.S.  Senate: 

I  am  pleased  to  transmit  herewith  for  your  information  and  use  the 
following  report  on  "Weather  Modification:  Programs,  Problems, 
Policy,  and  Potential." 

The  report  was  prepared  at  my  request  by  the  Congressional  Re- 
search Service  under  the  direction  of  Dr.  Robert  Morrison,  Specialist 
in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research  Division.  We  thank  Dr. 
Morrison  and  the  others  involved  in  the  study  for  their  extremely 
thorough  and  scholarly  report.  Substantial  material  on  almost  all 
areas  of  weather  modification  are  included  and  the  report  will  provide 
the  committee  with  an  excellent  reference  source  for  future  delibera- 
tions on  the  subject. 

The  completion  of  the  report  is  particularly  timely  due  to  the  up- 
coming recommendations  expected  from  the  Weather  Modification 
Advisory  Board  and  the  Department  of  Commerce  (as  directed  by 
Public  Law  94-490)  on  the  future  Federal  role  in  weather 
modification. 

James  B.  Pearson, 
Ranking  minority  member. 

(in) 


LETTER  REQUESTING  STUDY 


U.S.  Senate, 

Committee  on  Commerce,  Science,  and  Transportation, 

Washington,  D.C.,  July  30, 1976. 

Dr.  Norman  A.  Beckman, 

Acting  Director,  Congressional  Research  Service, 
Library  of  Congress,  W ashington,  D.C. 

Dear  Dr.  Beckman:  Weather  modification,  although  a  relatively 
young  science,  has  over  the  years  stimulated  great  interest  within  the 
scientific,  commercial,  governmental,  and  agricultural  communities. 
Such  responses  are  readily  understandable.  Weather-related  disasters 
and  hazards  affect  virtually  all  Americans  and  annually  cause  untold 
human  suffering  and  loss  of  life  and  result  in  billions  of  dollars  of  eco- 
nomic loss  to  crops  and  other  property.  While  weather  modification 
projects  have  been  operational  for  nearly  25  years  and  have  been 
shown  to  have  significant  potential  for  preventing,  diverting,  moderat- 
ing, or  ameliorating  the  adverse  effects  of  such  weather  related  disas- 
ters and  hazards,  I  am  greatly  concerned  regarding  the  lack  of  a 
coordinated  Federal  weather  modification  policy  and  a  coordinated 
and  comprehensive  program  for  weather  modification  research  and 
development.  This  fact  is  all  the  more  disturbing  in  view  of  the  mani- 
fest needs,  and  benefits,  social  and  economic,  that  can  be  associated  with 
weather  modification  activities.  These  deficiencies  in  our  Federal  orga- 
nizational structure  have  resulted  in  a  less  than  optimal  return  on  our 
investments  in  weather  modification  activities  and  a  failure,  with  few 
exceptions,  to  recognize  that  much  additional  research  and  develop- 
ment needs  to  be  carried  out  before  weather  modification  becomes  a 
truly  operational  tool. 

Reports  and  studies  conducted  by  such  diverse  organizations  as  the 
National  Academy  of  Sciences,  the  National  Advisory  Committee  on 
Oceans  and  Atmosphere,  the  General  Accounting  Office,  and  the 
Domestic  Council  have  highlighted  the  lack  of  a  comprehensive  Federal 
weather  modification  policy  and  research  and  development  program. 
Hearings  that  I  chaired  in  February  of  this  year  reinforced  my  con- 
cerns regarding  the  wisdom  of  our  continued  failure  to  implement  a 
national  policy  on  this  very  important  issue. 

I  am  therefore  requesting  the  Congressional  Research  Service  to 
prepare  a  comprehensive  report  on  weather  modification.  This  report 
should  include  a  review  of  the  history  and  existing  status  of  weather 
modification  knowledge  and  technology;  the  legislative  history  of 
existing  and  proposed  domestic  legislation  concerning  weather  mod- 
ification; socio-economic  and  legal  problems  presented  by  weather 
modification  activities;  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  existing  local, 
State,  Federal,  and  international  weather  modification  organizational 

(V) 


VI 


structure:  international  implications  of  weather  modification  activi- 
ties: and  a  review  and  discussion  of  alternative  U.S.  and  international 
weather  modification  policies  and  research  and  development  programs. 

If  you  have  any  questions  with  respect  to  this  request,  please  contact 
Mr.  Gerry  J.  Kovach,  Minority  Staff  Counsel  of  the  Senate  Commerce 
Committee.  He  has  discussed  this  study  with  Mr.  Robert  E.  Morrison 
and  Mr.  John  Justus  of  the  Science  Policy  Division,  Congressional 
Research  Service. 

Very  truly  yours, 

James  B.  Pearsox, 

U.S.  Senator. 


LETTER  OF  SUBMITTAL 


The  Library  of  Congress, 
congressional  research  service, 

Washington,  D.C.,  June  19, 1978. 

Hon.  James  B.  Pearson, 

Committee  on  Commerce,  Science,  and  Transportation, 
U.S.  Senate,  Washington,  D.C. 

Dear  Senator  Pearson:  The  enclosed  report,  entitled  "Weather 
Modification:  Programs,  Problems,  Policy,  and  Potential,"  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Congressional  Research  Service  in  response  to  your 
request. 

The  study  reviews  the  history,  technology,  activities,  and  a  number 
of  special  aspects  of  the  field  of  weather  modification.  Activities 
discussed  are  those  of  the  Federal,  State,  and  local  governments,  of 
private  organizations,  and  of  foreign  nations.  Consideration  is  given 
to  international,  legal,  economic,  and  ecological  aspects.  There  are 
also  an  introductory  chapter  which  includes  a  summary  of  issues,  a 
chapter  discussing  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification,  and 
a  chapter  summarizing  recommendations  from  major  Federal  policy 
studies. 

The  study  has  been  coordinated  by  Dr.  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Special- 
ist in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research  Division,  who  also 
prepared  chapters  1,  2,  3,  5,  7,  8,  and  9  as  well  as  the  Summary  and 
Conclusions.  Mr.  John  R.  Justus,  Analyst  in  Earth  Sciences,  and 
Dr.  James  E.  Mielke,  Analyst  in  Marine  and  Earth  Sciences,  both 
of  the  Science  Policy  Research  Division,  contributed  chapters  4  and 
6,  respectively.  Chapter  10  was  prepared  by  Mrs.  Lois  B.  McHugh, 
Foreign  Affairs  Analyst,  Foreign  Affairs  and  National  Defense  Di- 
vision. Chapter  11  was  written  jointly  by  Mrs.  Nancy  Lee  Jones, 
Legislative  Attorney,  and  Mr.  Daniel  Hill  Zaf ren,  Specialist  in  Ameri- 
can Public  Law,  both  of  the  American  Law  Division.  Dr.  Warren 
Viessman,  Jr.,  Senior  Specialist  in  Engineering  and  Public  Works, 
contributed  chapter  12;  and  Mr.  William  C.  JolW,  Analyst  in  En- 
vironmental Policy,  Environment  and  Natural  Resources  Division, 
was  responsible  for  chapter  13.  In  addition,  appendixes  C,  F,  Q,  and  R 
were  assembled  by  Mrs.  McHugh ;  appendixes  D  and  S  were  prepared 
by  Mrs.  Jones;  and  information  in  the  remaining  appendixes  was 
collected  by  Dr.  Morrison. 

I  trust  that  this  report  will  serve  the  needs  of  the  Committee  on 
Commerce,  Science,  and  Transportation  as  well  as  those  of  other 
committees  and  individual  Members  of  Congress  who  are  concerned 
with  weather  modification.  On  behalf  of  the  Congressional  Research 
Service,  I  wish  to  express  my  appreciation  for  the  opportunity  to 
undertake  this  timely  and  worthwhile  assignment. 
Sincerely, 

Gilbert  Gtjde, 

Director. 


(VII) 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/weatificatOOunit 


CONTENTS 


Page 


Letter  of  transmittal   in 

Letter  requesting  study   v 

Letter  of  submittal   vn 

Summary  and  conclusions   xix 

Chapter  1 

Introduction  and  summary  of  issues   1 

Perspective   1 

Situation   1 

Advantages   3 

Timeliness   5 

Definitions  and  scope  of  report   7 

Summary  of  issues  in  planned  weather  modification   9 

Technological  problems  and  issues   9 

Governmental  issues   12 

The  role  of  the  Federal  Government   12 

Roles  of  State  and  local  governments   14 

Legal  issues   15 

Private  rights  in  the  clouds   15 

Liability  for  weather  modification   16 

Interstate  legal  issues   17 

International  legal  issues   17 

Economic  issues   18 

Issues  complicating  economic  analyses  of  weather  modifica- 
tion  18 

Weather  modification  and  conflicting  interests   19 

Social  issues   19 

Social  factors   20 

Need  for  public  education  on  weather  modification   21 

Decisionmaking   22 

International  issues   23 

Ecological  issues   24 

Chapter  2 

History  of  weather  modification   25 

Introduction   25 

History  of  weather  modification  prior  to  1946   26 

Prescientific  period   26 

Early  scientific  period   27 

Development  of  scientific  fundamentals   32 

Early  cloud-seeding  experiments   34 

Weather  modification  since  1946   35 

Chronology   35 

Langmuir,  Schaefer,  and  Vonnegut   37 

Research  projects  since  1947   39 

Project  Cirrus   39 

The  Weather  Bureau  cloud  phvsics  project   41 

The  U.S.  experiments  of  1953-54   42 

Arizona  Mountain  cumulus  experiments   44 

Project  Whitetop   44 

Climax  experiments   45 

Lightning  suppression  experiments   46 

Fog  dispersal  research   46 

Hurricane  modification.   46 

Hail  suppression   46 

Foreign  weather  modification  research   47 

Commercial  operations   48 

History  of  Federal  activities,   committees,   policy  studies,  and 

reports   53 

(IX) 


X 

Chapter  3 

Page 


Technology  of  planned  weather  modification   55 

Introduction   55 

Assessment  of  the  status  of  weather  modification  technology   56 

Classification  of  weather  modification  technologies   61 

Principles  and  status  of  weather  modification  technologies   62 

Precipitation  augmentation   64 

Cumulus  clouds   66 

Cumulus  modification  experiments   67 

Effectiveness  of  precipitation  enhancement  research  and 

operations   69 

Results  achieved  through  cumulus  modification   70 

Recent  advances  in  cumulus  cloud  modification   71 

Orographic  clouds  and  precipitation   71 

Orographic  precipitation  modification   75 

Orographic  seeding  experiments  and  seedability  criteria   77 

Operational  orographic  seeding  projects   81 

Results  achieved  through  orographic  precipitation  modifi- 
cation  82 

Hail  suppression   84 

The  hail  problem   84 

Modification  of  hail   86 

Hail  seeding  technologies   87 

Evaluation  of  hail  suppression  technology   88 

Surveys  of  hail  suppression  effectiveness   89 

Conclusions  from  the  TASH  study   91 

Dissipation  of  fog  and  stratus  clouds   92 

Cold  fog  modification   93 

Warm  fog  modification   93 

Lightning  suppression   96 

Lightning  modification   98 

Evaluation  of  lightning  suppression  technology   99 

Modification  of  severe  storms   101 

Hurricanes   101 

Generation  and  characteristics  of  hurricanes   104 

Modification  of  hurricanes   108 

Tornadoes   112 

Modification  of  tornadoes   113 

Technical  problem  areas  in  planned  weather  modification   115 

Seeding  technology   115 

Evaluation  of  weather  modification  projects   118 

Extended  area  effects  of  weather  modification   124 

Approaches  to  weather  modification  other  than  seeding   129 

Research  needs  for  the  development  of  planned  weather  modification-  131 

General  considerations   131 

Recommendations  from  the  1973  National  Academv  of  Sciences 

study  i   134 

Recommendations  of  the  Advanced  Planning  Group  of  NOAA__.  136 

Summary  of  Federal  research  needs  expressed  by  State  officials.  138 
Research  recommendations  of  the  AMS  Committee  on  Weather 

Modification   139 

Research  recommendations  related  to  extended  area  and  time 

effects   143 

Chapter  4 

Inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification   145 

Introduction   145 

Terminology   145 

Climate   145 

Climatic  fluctuation  and  climatic  change   146 

Weather   146 

Weather  modification   146 

Climate  modification   146 

Planned  climate  modification   147 

Inadvertent  climate  modification   148 


XI 

Page 

Background   149 

Historical  perspective   149 

Understanding  the  causes  of  climatic  change  and  variability   151 

The  concept  of  climatic  change  and  variability   152 

When  and  how  do  climatic  changes  occur   154 

The  facts  about  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification   156 

Airborne  particulate  matter  and  atmospheric  turbidity   156 

Do  more  particles  mean  a  warming  or  cooling?   157 

Sources  of  atmospheric  particulates:  Natural  vs.  manmade..  158 

Atmospheric  processes  affected  by  particulates   159 

The  La  Porte  weather  anomaly:  Urban  climate  modification.  162 

Carbon  dioxide  and  water  vapor   164 

Increases   in   atmospheric   carbon   dioxide  concentration: 

What  the  record  indicates   164 

Predicting  future  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  levels   166 

Sources  and  sinks  for  carbon  dioxide   168 

Atmospheric  effects  of  increased  carbon  dioxide  levels   169 

Implications  of  increasing  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  con- 
centrations  169 

Implications  of  a  climatic  warming   170 

Carbon  dioxide  and  future  climate:  The  real  climate  vs. 

"model  climate"   171 

Ozone  depletion   172 

Concerns  regarding  ozone  destruction   172 

Action  by  the  Government  on  the  regulation  of  fluorocar- 

bons   175 

Climatic  effects  of  ozone  depletion   176 

Waste  heat   177 

The  urban  "Heat  Island"   177 

Albedo   179 

Large-scale  irrigation   180 

Recapitulation   181 

Issues  in  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification   184 

Climatic  barriers  to  long-term  energy  growth   184 

Thoughts  and  reflections — Can  we  contemplate  a  fossil-fuel-free 

world?   185 

Research  needs  and  deficiencies   186 

Chapter  5 

Federal  activities  in  weather  modification   193 

Overview  of  Federal  activities..--    '—  —   193 

Legislative  and  congressional  activities   194 

Federal  legislation  on  weather  modification   194 

Summary   194 

The  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control   195 

Direction  to  the  National  Science  Foundation   196 

Reporting  of  weather  modification  activities  to  the  Federal 

Government   197 

The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976   198 

Congressional  direction  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation   201 

Proposed  Federal  legislation  on  weather  modification   203 

Summary   203 

Legislation  proposed  in  the  94th  Congress  and  the  95th 

Congress,  1st  sessions   205 

Other  congressional  activities   207 

Resolutions  on  weather  modification   207 

Hearings   208 

Studies  and  reports  by  congressional  support  agencies   209 

Activities  of  the  executive  branch   209 

Introduction   209 

Institutional  structure  of  the   Federal  weather  modification 

program   210 

Current  status  of  Federal  organization  for  weather  modifica- 
tion  210 


xn 

3?a?e 


Federal  structure;  1946-57   214 

Federal  structure;  1958-68   215 

Federal  structure;  1968-77   216 

Future  Federal  organization  for  weather  modification   216 

Coordination  and  advisory  mechanisms  for  Federal  weather 

modification  programs   221 

Introduction   221 

The  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences 

(ICAS)   222 

The   National   Academv   of   Sciences/Committee   on  At- 
mospheric Sciences  (N AS/CAS)   226 

The  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmos- 
phere (NACOA)   227 

Other  coordination  and  advisory  mechanisms   228 

Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board   231 

Weather  modification  activities  reporting  program   232 

Background  and  regulations   232 

Reporting  of  Federal  activities   233 

Summary  reports  on  U.S.  weather  modification  activities   233 

Federal  studies  and  reports  on  weather  modification   234 

Introduction   234 

Studies  of  the  early  1950's   235 

Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control   236 

National  Academy  of  Sciences  studies   237 

Studies  bv  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences  (ICAS)   238 

Domestic  Council  study   239 

Policy  and  planning  reports  produced  by  Federal  agencies   239 

Federal  programs  in  weather  modification   241 

Introduction  and  funding  summaries   241 

Department  of  the  Interior   246 

Introduction   246 

Project  Skywater;  general  discussion   247 

The  Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project  (CRBPP)   254 

The  High  Plains  Cooperative  Program  (HIPLFX)   258 

The  Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project  (SCPP)   263 

Drought  mitigation  assistance   266 

National  Science  Foundation   267 

Introduction  and  general   267 

Weather  hazard  mitigation   274 

Weather  modification  technology  development   282 

Inadvertent  weather  modification   283 

Societal  utilization  activities   287 

Agricultural  weather  modification   288 

Department  of  Commerce   290 

Introduction  and  general  discussion   290 

The  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment  (FACE)   292 

Project  Stormfurv   296 

Research  Facilities  Center  (RFC)   300 

Global  Monitoring  for  Climatic  Change  (GMCC)   301 

Lightning  suppression   302 

Modification  of  extratropical  severe  storms   302 

Department  of  Defense   303 

Introduction   303 

Air  Force  fog  dispersal  operations   303 

Army  research  and  development   304 

Navy  research  and  development   304 

Air  Force  research  and  development   305 

Overseas  operations   307 

Department  of  Transportation   308 

Department  of  Agriculture   309 

Department  of  Energy   310 


XIII 


Chapter  6 

Review  of  recommendations  for  a  national  program  in  weather  modifica-  Page 

tion   313 

Introduction   ^Jy 

Summaries  of  major  weather  modification  reports   314 

Final  report  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control —  314 
Weather  and  climate  modification:  Report  of  the  Special  Com- 
mission on  Weather  Modification   315 

Weather  and  climate  modification:  Problems  and  prospects   317 

A  recommended  national  program  in  weather  modification   318 

A  national  program  for  accelerating  progress  in  weather  modifica- 
tion  320 

Weather  and  climate  modification:  Problems  and  progress   321 

Annual  reports  to  the  President  and  Congress  by  NACOA   323 

Need  for  a  national  weather  modification  research  program   324 

The  Federal  role  in  weather  modification   325 

Trends  and  analysis   326 

Chapter  7 

State  and  local  activities  in  weather  modification   331 

Overview  of  State  weather  modification  activities   331 

Introduction   331 

North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council   333 

Survey  and  summary  of  State  interests  and  activities  in  weather 

modification   340 

State  contacts  for  information  on  weather  modification  activities.  343 

Non-Federal  U.S.  weather  modification  activities   343 

Analysis  of  calendar  year  1975  projects   344 

Preliminary  analysis  of  projects  for  calendar  years  1976-77_  347 
General  discussion  of  local  and  regional  weather  modification  policy 

activities  „  348 

Weather  modification  activities  within  particular  States   351 

California   352 

State  weather  modification  law  and  regulations   352 

Weather  modification  projects   353 

State-sponsored  emergency  projects   356 

Illinois   358 

Illinois  weather  modification  law  and  its  administration   358 

Operational  projects   359 

Research  activities   360 

Kansas   361 

Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act   361 

Research  activities   362 

Operational  activities   364 

Emergenc}-  Drought  Act  of  1977   364 

North  Dakota   365 

Weather  modification  law  and  administration  of  regulations-  365 

Authority  and  organization  for  local  projects   370 

North  Dakota  operational  projects  in  1975  and  1976   371 

South  Dakota   376 

Utah   381 

Washington   382 

Chapter  8 

Private  activities  in  weather  modification   385 

Introduction   385 

Commercial  weather  modifiers   386 

Scope  and  significance  of  contract  activities   386 

Summary  of  contract  services   386 

Evaluation  and  research  by  commercial  firms   388 

Participation  in  Federal  research  programs   389 

Weather  modification  organizations   389 

Professional  organizations   389 

Weather  Modification  Association   390 

American  Meteorological  Society   395 


XIV 


Page 

Opposition  to  weather  modification   399 

General  discussion   399 

Opposition  to  the  seeding  project  above  Hungry  Horse  Dam.  399 

Tri-State  Natural  Weather  Association   400 

Citizens  for  the  Preservation  of  Natural  Resources   402 

Chapter  9 

Foreign'activities  in  weather  modification   405 

Introduction   405 

World  Meteorological  Organization  register  of  weather  modification 

projects   408 

Description  of  weather  modification  activities  in  some  foreign  nations.  412 

The  Union  of  Soviet  Socialist  Republics   412 

Overview  of  projects  in  the  U.S.S.R   412 

Summary  of  weather  modification  and  related  atmospheric 

research  in  the  U.S.S.R   413 

Israel   415 

Australia   416 

Canada   418 

Mexico   419 

People's  Republic  of  China   420 

Kenya   421 

Republic  of  South  Africa   422 

Rhodesia   423 

India   423 

The  Swiss  hail  experiment   424 

Chapter  10 

International  aspects  of  weather  modification   427 

Introduction   427 

Convention  on  the  prohibition  of  military  or  any  other  hostile  use  of 

environmental  modification  techniques   429 

Development  of  the  treaty   429 

Criticism  of  the  convention   431 

Activities  since  the  United  Nations  approval  of  the  convention..  432 
Activities  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization  in  weather 

modification   433 

Precipitation  enhancement  program  (PEP)   434 

Other  WMO  activities  in  weather  modification   436 

Registration  and  reporting  of  weather  modification  projects.  436 

WMO  conferences  on  weather  modification   436 

Typhoon  and  serious  storm  modification   437 

Global  atmospheric  research  programme   437 

Legal  aspects  of  weather  modification   437 

United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human  Environment   438 

Declaration  of  the  United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human 

Environment   438 

Action  Plan  for  the  Human  Environment   438 

Earthwatch  Program   439 

Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  Climate   439 

Other  international  activities   440 

United  States/Canadian  agreement   440 

North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council   440 

Congressional  activities   441 

Weather  modification  as  a  weapon  of  war   441 

Senate  Resolution  71,  prohibiting  environmental  modification 

as  a  weapon  of  war   441 

Congressional  activities  related  to  hostile  use  of  weather 

modification,  1974-76   442 

Other  Congressional  actions  relating  to  weather  modification   443 

Senate  Concurrent  Resolution  67 — U.S.  participation  in  the 

world  weather  program   443 

National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976   444 

Senate  Resolution  49   444 


XV 


Page 


U.S.  foreign  policy   444 

Various  executive  branch  proposals   445 

National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere   447 

Activities  in  1977   448 

Chapter  11 

Legal  aspects  of  weather  modification   449 

Domestic   449 

Private  rights  in  the  clouds   449 

Liability  for  weather  modification   453 

Defenses  which  may  be  raised  against  claims  of  liability   456 

Interstate  allocation  of  atmospheric  water   457 

Methods  of  controlling  weather  modification   459 

Congressional  authority  under  the  Constitution  to  regulate  or 

license  weather  modification  activities   461 

Federalism   461 

The  commerce  clause   461 

The  commerce  clause  generally   462 

The  commerce  clause  and  the  regulation  of  navigable 

waters   463 

Limitations  on  the  commerce  power   464 

Fiscal  powers   465 

War  powers   466 

Property  power   466 

Treaty  power   467 

Conclusion   467 

International   468 

Certain  hostile  uses  of  weather  modification  are  prohibited   471 

Nations  are  responsible  for  environmental  conduct  which  causes 

injury  or  damage  in  or  to  other  nations   471 

Nations  are  liable  for  injuries  sustained  by  aliens  within  their 
territory  caused  by  tortuous  conduct  in  violation  of  inter- 
national law   472 

Nations  or  their  citizens  may  be  liable  for  injury  and  damage 
they  caused  to  citizens  of  another  nation  occurring  in  that 

nation   472 

Chapter  12 

Economic  aspects  of  weather  modification   475 

Introduction   475 

Economic  setting   476 

Economic  aspects  of  weather  modification  procedures   477 

Fog  dispersal   477 

Precipitation  augmentation   478 

Orographic  cloud  seeding   478 

Convective  cloud  seeding   478 

Precipitation  augmentation  and  energy  considerations   479 

Hail  suppression   480 

Lightning  suppression  and  reduction  in  storm  damage   480 

Analytic  methods  for  economic  analysis   481 

Case  studies  of  the  economics  of  weather  modification   482 

Hungry  Horse  Area,  Montana   482 

Connecticut  River  basin   483 

State  of  Illinois   483 

Nine-county  Southeastern  Crop  Reporting  District,  South  Dakota,  483 

Colorado  River   484 

Conclusions   486 

Chapter  13 

Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification   487 

Introduction   487 

Modification  of  weather  and  climate   487 

Ecology  and  ecological  systems  —  487 

Knowledge  of  ecological  implications  of  applied  weather  modifi- 
cation technologies   488 


XVI 


Page 


Important  variables   490 

Temporal  considerations   491 

Season  of  modification  effort   491 

Duration  of  effort:  Short-  v.  long-term   491 

Regularity  of  modification  effort   491 

Ecosystem  type   492 

Aquatic  v.  terrestrial  systems   492 

Cultivated  v.  natural  systems   492 

Arid  v.  humid  systems   492 

Cumulative  and  synergistic  effects   492 

Effects  of  silver  iodide*   493 

Deliberate  weather  modification   496 

Precipitation  enhancement   496 

Increased  rainfall   496 

Snowpack  augmentation   497 

Severe  storm  abatement   498 

Fog  dispersal   499 

Hail  suppression   499 

Alteration  or  arrest  of  lightning  discharges   499 

Inadvertent  weather  modification   499 

Extra-area  effects   499 

Long-term,  climatic,  and  global  implications   500 

Summary  and  conclusions   501 

Appendixes 

A.  Statement   on  weather  modification    in   Congressional   Record  of 

June  17,  1975,  by  Congressman  Gilbert  Gude,  containing  White 

House  statement  on  Federal  weather  modification  policy   503 

B.  Department  of  Defense  statement  on  position  on  weather  modification.  509 

C.  Text  of  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  prohibition  of  military 

or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques   510 

D.  State  statutes  concerning  weather  modification   514 

Arizona   515 

California   516 

Colorado   520 

Connecticut   528 

Florida   529 

Hawaii   531 

Idaho   531 

Illinois   533 

Iowa   541 

Kansas   543 

Louisiana   549 

Minnesota   550 

Montana   554 

Nebraska   557 

Nevada   565 

New  Hampshire   571 

New  Mexico   571 

New  York   573 

North  Dakota   573 

Oklahoma   584 

Oregon   59 1 

Pennsylvania   599 

South*  Dakota   604 

Texas   600 

Utah   612 

Washington   613 

West  Virginia   618 

Wisconsin   622 

Wyoming   622 

E.  List  of  State  contacts  for  further  information  on  weather  modification 

activities  within  the  States   625 

F.  Agreement   on   exchange  of   information   on   weather  modification 

between  the  United  States  of  America  and  Canada   627 


XVII 


G.  Weather  modification  activities  in  the  United  States  during  calendar  Pa?e 

year  1975   630 

H.  Selected  bibliography  of  publications  in  weather  modification   641 

I.  Public  laws  dealing  specifically  with  weather  modification   640 

J.    Summary  of  language  in  congressional  documents  supporting  public 

works  appropriations  for  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation's  atmospheric 

water  resources  program   655 

K.  Membership  and  charter  of  the  U.S.   Department  of  Commerce 

Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board   660 

L.  Rules  and  regulations  and  required  forms  for  submitting  information 
on  weather  modification  activities  to  the  National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  in 

accordance  with  requirements  of  Public  Law  92-205   662 

M.  Selected  State  rules  and  regulations  for  the  administration  of  State 

weather  modification  statutes   676 

Illinois   676 

Kansas   6  S3 

North  Dakota   691 

Utah   707 

Washington   712 

N.  Documents  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association   717 

O.   Policy  statement  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  on  purposeful 

and  inadvertent  modification  of  weather  and  climate   722 

P.  Reporting  agencies  of  member  countries  and  questionnaire  circulated 
to  receive  weather  modification  information  from  members  of  the 

World  Meteorological  Organization   724 

Q.  Report  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization/ United  Nations 
Environment  programme  informal  meeting  on  legal  aspects  of 

weather  modification   727 

R.  Text  of  Senate  Resolution  71;  considered,  amended,  and  agreed  to 

July  11,  1973   734 

S.    Reported  cases  on  weather  modification   740 

T.    Glossary  of  selected  terms  in  weather  modification   741 


34-857—79  2 


SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSIONS 


Weather  modification  is  generally  considered  to  be  the  deliberate 
effort  to  improve  atmospheric  conditions  for  beneficial  human  pur- 
poses— to  augment  water  supplies  through  enhanced  precipitation  or 
to  reduce  economic  losses,  property  damages,  and  deaths  through 
mitigation  of  adverse  effects  of  hail,  lightning,  fog,  and  severe  storms. 
Not  all  weather  modification  activities,  however,  have  been  or  can  be 
designed  to  benefit  everyone,  and  some  intentional  operations  have 
been  used,  or  are  perceived  to  have  been  used,  as  a  weapon  of  war 
to  impede  the  mobility  or  tactical  readiness  of  an  enemy.  Further- 
more, environmental  change  is  also  effected  unintentionally  and  with- 
out any  purpose  at  all,  as  man  inadvertently  modifies  the  weather  and 
climate,  whether  for  better  or  worse  scientists  are  not  certain,  through 
activities  such  as  clearing  large  tracts  of  land,  building  urban  areas, 
and  combustion  of  fossil  fuels. 

Historically,  there  have  been  attempts,  often  nonscientific  or  pseudo- 
scientific  at  best,  to  change  the  weather  for  man's  benefit.  Until  the 
20th  century,  however,  the  scientific  basis  for  such  activities  was 
meager,  with  most  of  our  current  understanding  of  cloud  physics  and 
precipitation  processes  beginning  to  unfold  during  the  1930's.  The 
modern  period  in  weather  modification  is  about  three  decades  old,  dat- 
ing from  events  in  1946,  when  Schaefer  and  Langmuir  of  the  General 
Electric  Co.  demonstrated  that  a  cloud  of  supercooled  water  droplets 
could  be  transformed  into  ice  crystals  when  seeded  with  dry  ice.  Soon 
afterward  it  was  discovered  that  fine  particles  of  pure  silver  iodide, 
with  crystal  structure  similar  to  that  of  ice,  were  effective  artificial 
ice  nuclei,  and  that  seeding  clouds  with  such  particles  could  produce 
ice  crystals  at  temperatures  just  below  freezing.  Silver  iodide  remains 
the  most  often  used  material  in  modern  "cloud  seeding." 

By  the  1950's,  many  experimental  and  operational  weather  modifi- 
cation projects  were  underway;  however,  these  early  attempts  to 
augment  precipitation  or  to  alter  severe  storm  effects  were  often  in- 
conclusive or  ineffective,  owing  to  improper  experimental  design,  lack 
of  evaluation  schemes,  and  the  primitive  state  of  the  technology. 
Through  research  programs  over  the  past  two  decades,  including 
laboratory  studies  and  field  experiments,  understanding  of  atmos- 
pheric processes  essential  to  improved  weather  modification  tech- 
nology has  been  advanced.  Sophisticated  evaluation  schemes  have  been 
developed,  using  elaborate  statistical  tools;  there  has  also  been  im- 
provement in  measuring  instruments  and  weather  radar  systems ;  and 
simulation  of  weather  processes  using  numerical  models  and  high 
speed  computers  has  provided  further  insights.  Meanwhile,  commer- 
cial weather  modifiers,  whose  number  decreased  dramatically  along 
with  the  total  area  of  the  United  States  covered  by  their  operations 
after  the  initial  surge  of  the  1950  era,  have  grown  in  respectability  and 
competence,  and  their  operations  have  incorporated  improvements  as 
they  benefited  from  their  accumulated  experience  and  from  the  re- 

(XIX) 


XX 


suits  of  research  projects.  Since  such  operations  are  designed  for  prac- 
tical results,  such  as  increased  precipitation  or  reduced  hail,  however, 
the  sophisticated  evaluation  procedures  now  used  in  most  research 
projects  are  most  often  not  used,  so  that  the  effectiveness  of  the  opera- 
tions is  frequently  difficult  to  assess. 

Weather  modification  is  at  best  an  emerging  technology.  Progress  in 
development  of  the  technology  over  the  past  30  years  has  been  slow, 
although  there  has  been  an  increased  awareness  of  the  complex  nature 
of  atmospheric  processes  and  a  steady  improvement  in  basic  under- 
standing of  those  processes  which  underlie  attempts  at  deliberate  modi- 
fication of  weather  phenomena.  Though  most  cloud-seeding  practices 
are  based  on  a  common  theory  and  form  the  basis  for  a  number  of  seed- 
ing objectives,  there  are  really  a  series  of  weather  modification 
technologies,  each  tailored  to  altering  a  particular  atmospheric  pheno- 
menon and  each  having  reached  a  different  state  of  development  and 
operational  usefulness.  For  example,  cold  fog  clearing  is  now  consid- 
ered to  be  operational,  while,  at  the  other  extreme,  the  abatement  of 
severe  storms  such  as  hurricanes  remains  in  the  initial  research  phase. 
Development  progress  for  each  of  these  technologies  appears  to  be 
much  less  a  function  of  research  effort  expended  than  a  dependence  on 
the  fundamental  atmospheric  processes  and  the  ease  by  which  they  can 
be  altered.  There  continues  to  be  obvious  need  for  further  research  and 
development  to  refine  those  few  techniques  for  which  there  has  been 
some  success  and  to  advance  technology  where  progress  has  been  slow 
or  at  a  virtual  standstill. 

The  following  summary  provides  a  reasonably  accurate  assessment 
of  the  current  status  of  weather  modification  technology : 

1.  The  only  routine  operational  projects  are  for  clearing  cold  fog. 
Research  on  warm  fog  has  yielded  some  useful  knowledge  and  good 
models,  but  the  resulting  technologies  are  so  costly  that  they  are  usable 
mainly  for  military  purposes  and  very  busy  airports. 

2.  Several  longrunning  efforts  to  increase  winter  snowpack  by  seed- 
ing clouds  in  the  mountains  suggest  that  precipitation  can  be  increased 
by  some  15  percent  over  what  would  have  happened  "naturally." 

3.  A  decade  and  a  half  of  experience  with  seeding  winter  clouds  on 
the  U.S.  west  coast  and  in  Israel,  and  summer  clouds  in  Florida,  also 
suggest  a  10-  to  15-percent  increase  over  "natural"  rainfall.  Hypotheses 
and  techniques  from  the  work  in  one  area  are  not  directly  transferable 
to  other  areas,  but  will  be  helpful  in  designing  comparable  experiments 
with  broadly  similar  cloud  systems. 

4.  Numerous  efforts  to  increase  rain  by  seeding  summer  clouds  in  the 
central  and  western  parts  of  the  United  States  have  left  many  questions 
unanswered.  A  major  experiment  to  try  to  answer  them — for  the  High 
Plains  area — is  now  in  its  early  stages. 

5.  It  is  scientifically  possible  to  open  holes  in  wintertime  cloud  layers 
by  seeding  them.  Increasing  sunshine  and  decreasing  energy  consmp- 
tion  may  be  especially  relevant  in  the  northeastern  quadrant  of  the 
United  States. 

0.  Some  $10  million  is  spent  by  private  and  local  public  sponsors  for 
cloud-seeding  efforts,  but  these  projects  arc  not  designed  as  scientific 
experiments  and  it  is  difficult  to  say  for  sure  that  operational  cloud 
seeding  causes  the  claimed  results. 


XXI 


7.  Knowledge  about  hurricanes  is  improving  with  good  models  of 
their  behavior.  But  the  experience  in  modifying  that  behavior  is  primi- 
tive so  far.  It  is  inherently  difficult  to  find  enough  test  cases,  especially 
since  experimentation  on  typhoons  in  the  Western  Pacific  has  been 
blocked  for  the  time  being  by  international  political  objections. 

8.  Although  the  Soviets  and  some  U.S.  private  operators  claim  some 
success  in  suppressing  hail  by  seeding  clouds,  our  understanding  of  the 
physical  processes  that  create  hail  is  still  weak.  The  one  major  U.S. 
held  experiment  increased  our  understanding  of  severe  storms,  but 
otherwise  proved  mostly  the  dimensions  of  what  we  do  not  yet  know. 

9.  There  have  been  many  efforts  to  suppress  lightning  by  seeding 
thunderstorms.  Our  knowledge  of  the  processes  involved  is  fair,  but  the 
technology  is  still  far  from  demonstrated,  and  the  U.S.  Forest  Service 
has  recently  abandoned  further  lightning  experiments.1 

Modification  processes  may  also  be  initiated  or  triggered  inadvert- 
ently rather  than  purposefully,  and  the  possibility  exists  that  society 
may  be  changing  the  climate  through  its  own  actions  by  pushing  on 
ceitain  leverage  points.  Inadvertently,  man  is  already  causing  measur- 
able variations  on  the  local  scale.  Artificial  climatic  effects  have  been 
observed  and  documented  on  local  and  regional  scales,  particularly  in 
and  downwind  of  heavily  populated  industrial  areas  where  waste  heat, 
particulate  pollution  and  altered  ground  surface  characteristics  are 
primarily  responsible  for  the  perceived  climate  modification.  The  cli- 
mate in  and  near  large  cities,  for  example,  is  warmer,  the  daily  range 
of  temperature  is  less,  and  annual  precipitation  is  greater  than  if  the 
cities  had  neA^er  been  built.  Although  not  verifiable  at  present,  the  time 
may  not  be  far  off  when  human  activities  will  result  in  measurable 
large-scale  changes  in  weather  and  climate  of  more  than  passing  sig- 
nificance. It  is  important  to  appreciate  the  fact  that  the  role  of  man  at 
this  global  level  is  still  controversial,  and  existing  models  of  the  gen- 
eral circulation  are  not  yet  capable  of  testing  the  effects  in  a  conclusive 
manner. 

Nevertheless,  a  growing  fraction  of  current  evidence  does  point  to 
the  possibility  of  unprecedented  impact  on  the  global  climate  by  hu- 
man activities,  albeit  the  effects  may  be  occurring  below  the  threshold 
where  they  could  be  statistically  detected  relative  to  the  record  of  nat- 
ural fluctuations  and.  therefore,  could  be  almost  imperceptible  amid 
the  ubiquitous  variability  of  climate.  But  while  the  degree  of  influence 
on  world  climate  may  as  yet  be  too  small  to  detect  against  the  back- 
ground of  natural  variations  and  although  mathematical  models  of 
climatic  change  are  still  imperfect,  significant  global  effects  in  the 
future  are  inferred  if  the  rates  of  growth  of  industry  and  population 
persist. 

For  over  30  years  both  legislative  and  executive  branches  of  the 
Federal  Government  have  been  involved  in  a  number  of  aspects  of 
weather  modification.  Since  1947  about  110  weather  modification  bills 
pertaining  to  research  support,  operations,  grants,  policy  studies,  regu- 
lations, liabilities,  activity  reporting,  establishment  of  panels  and  com- 
mittees, and  international  concerns  have  been  introduced  in  the  Con- 

1  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  "A  U.S.  Policy  to  Enhance  the  Atmospheric 
Environment,"  Oct.  21,  1977.  In  testimony  by  Harlan  Cleveland.  Weather  modification. 
Hearing  before  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  Committee  on 
Science  and  Technology.  U.S.  House  of  Representatives.  93th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  Oct.  26, 
1977,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1977.  pp.  28-30. 


XXII 


gress.  Resolutions,  mostly  concerned  with  using  weather  modification 
ns  a  weapon  and  promotion  of  a  United  Nations  treaty  banning  such 
activities,  have  also  been  introduced  in  both  houses  of  the  Congress ; 
one  such  resolution  was  passed  by  the  Senate. 

Six  public  laws  specifically  dealing  with  weather  modification  have 
been  enacted  since  1953,  and  others  have  included  provisions  which  are 
in  some  way  relevant  to  weather  modification.  Federal  weather  modi- 
fication legislation  has  dealt  primarily  with  three  aspects — research 
program  authorization  and  direction,  collection  and  reporting  of  in- 
formation on  weather  modification  activities,  and  the  commissioning 
of  major  policy  studies.  In  addition  to  direction  through  authorizing 
legislation,  the  Congress  initiated  one  major  Federal  research  pro- 
gram through  a  write-in  to  an  appropriations  bill;  this  program 
regularly  receives  support  through  additional  appropriations  beyond 
recommended  OMB  funding  levels. 

There  are  two  Federal  laws  currently  in  effect  which  are  specifically 
concerned  with  weather  modification.  Public  Law  92-205,  of  Decem- 
ber 18,  1971,  and  its  amendments  requires  the  reporting  of  all  non- 
Federal  activities  to  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  publication  "from 
time  to  time"  of  summaries  of  such  activities  by  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce.2  The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976 
(Public  Law  94-490),  enacted  October  13, 1976,  directed  the  Secretary 
of  Commerce  to  conduct  a  major  study  on  weather  modification  and  to 
submit  a  report  containing  a  recommended  Federal  policy  and  Fed- 
eral research  program  on  wTeather  modification.  The  Secretary  ap- 
pointed a  non-Government  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  to 
conduct  the  mandated  study,  the  report  on  which  is  to  be  submitted 
to  the  Secretary  for  her  review  and  comment  and  subsequent  trans- 
mittal to  the  President  and  the  Congress  during  1978.  It  is  expected 
that,  following  receipt  of  the  aforementioned  report,  the  Congress  will 
consider  legislation  on  Federal  weather  modification  policy,  presuma- 
bly during  the  96th  Congress. 

Congressional  interest  in  weather  modification  has  also  been  mani- 
fested in  a  number  of  hearings  on  various  bills,  in  oversight  hearings 
on  pertinent  ongoing  Federal  agency  programs,  in  consideration  of 
some  22  resolutions  having  to  do  with  weather  modification,  and  in 
commissioning  studies  on  the  subject  by  congressional  support 
agencies. 

The  principal  involvement  in  weather  modification  of  the  Federal 
Government  has  been  through  the  research  and  development  programs 
of  the  several  Federal  departments  and  agencies.  Although  Federal 
research  programs  can  be  traced  from  at  least  the  period  of  World 
War  II,  the  programs  of  most  agencies  other  than  the  Defense  Depart- 
ment were  not  begun  until  the  1950's  and  1960's.  These  research  and 
development  programs  have  been  sponsored  at  various  times  by  at 
least  eight  departments  and  independent  agencies — including  the  De- 
partments of  Agriculture,  Commerce,  Defense,  Energy,  Interior,  and 
Transportation,  the  National  Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration 
(NASA),  and  the  National  Science  Foundation  (NSF).  In  fiscal  year 


2  Although  Federal  agencies  were  excluded  from  the  requirements  of  this  not.  upon 
Tnutu.il  agreement,  the  agencies  also  submit  information  on  their  weather  mollification 
projects  to  tlie  Secretary  of  Commerce,  so  that  there  is  a  single  repository  for  information 
on  nil  weather  modification  activities  conducted  within  the  United  States. 


XXIII 


1978  six  agency  programs  were  reported,  those  of  Transportation  and 
NASA  having  been  phased  out,  while  that  of  Agriculture  was  severely 
curtailed. 

Total  funding  for  Federal  weather  modification  research  in  fiscal 
year  1978  is  estimated  at  about  $17  million,  a  decline  from  the  highest 
funding  level  of  $20  million  reached  in  fiscal  year  1976.  The  largest 
programs  are  those  of  the  Departments  of  Interior  and  Commerce  and 
of  the  NSF.  The  NSF  has  supported  weather  modification  research 
over  a  broad  spectrum  for  two  decades,  although  its  fiscal  year  1978 
funding  was  reduced  by  more  than  50  percent,  and  it  is  not  clear  that 
more  than  the  very  basic  atmospheric  science  supportive  of  weather 
modification  will  be  sponsored  hereafter  by  the  Foundation. 

The  present  structure  of  Federal  organization  for  weather  modifi- 
cation research  activities  is  characterized  essentially  by  the  mission- 
oriented  approach,  whereby  each  of  the  agencies  conducts  its  own 
program  in  accordance  with  broad  agency  goals  or  under  specific  direc- 
tions from  the  Congress  or  the  Executive.  Programs  have  been  loosely 
coordinated  through  various  independent  arrangements  and/or  advi- 
sory panels  and  particularly  through  the  Interdepartmental  Commit- 
tee for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS).  The  ICAS,  established  in  1959 
by  the  former  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  provides 
advice  on  matters  related  to  atmospheric  science  in  general  and  has 
also  been  the  principal  coordinating  mechanism  for  Federal  research 
in  weather  modification. 

In  1958  the  National  Science  Foundation  was  designated  lead  agency 
for  Federal  weather  modification  research  by  Public  Law  85-510,  a 
role  which  it  maintained  until  1968,  when  Public  Law  90-407  removed 
this  responsibility  from  NSF.  No  further  action  was  taken  to  name  a 
lead  agency,  although  there  have  been  numerous  recommendations  to 
designate  such  a  lead  agency,  and  several  bills  introduced  in  the  Con- 
gress would  have  named  either  the  Department  of  the  Interior  or  the 
Department  of  Commerce  in  that  role.  During  the  10-year  period  from 
1958  to  1968  the  NSF  promoted  a  vigorous  research  program  through 
grants  to  various  research  organizations,  established  an  Advisory 
Panel  for  Weather  Modification,  and  published  a  series  of  10  annual 
reports  on  weather  modification  activities  in  the  United  States.  Since 
1968  there  has  been  a  lapse  in  Federal  weather  modification  policy  and 
in  the  Federal  structure  for  research  programs,  although,  after  a 
hiatus  of  over  3  years,  the  responsibility  for  collecting  and  disseminat- 
ing information  on  weather  modification  activities  was  assigned  to  the 
Commerce  Department  in  1971.  An  important  consideration  of  any 
future  weather  modification  legislation  will  probably  be  the  organiza- 
tional structure  of  the  Federal  research  program  and  that  for  admin- 
istration of  other  related  functions  which  may  be  the  responsibility  of 
the  Federal  Government.  Options  include  a  continuation  of  the  present 
mission-oriented  approach  with  coordination  through  the  ICAS  or  a 
similar  interagency  body,  redesignation  of  a  lead  agency  with  some 
autonomy  remaining  with  the  several  agencies,  or  creation  of  a  single 
agency  with  control  of  all  funding  and  all  research  responsibilities. 
The  latter  could  be  an  independent  agency  or  part  of  a  larger  depart- 
ment ;  it  would  presumably  also  administer  other  aspects  of  Federal 
weather  modification  responsibilities,  such  as  reporting  of  activities, 


XXIV 


regulation  and  licensing,  and  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  operations, 
if  a  n}'  or  all  of  these  functions  should  become  or  continue  to  be  services 
performed  at  the  Federal  level. 

In  addition  to  specific  research  programs  sponsored  bv  Federal  agen- 
cies, there  are  other  functions  related  to  weather  modification  which 
are  performed  in  several  places  in  the  executive  branch.  Various  Fed- 
eral advisory  panels  and  committees  and  their  staffs — established  to 
conduct  in-depth  studies  and  prepare  comprehensive  reports,  to  pro- 
vide advice  and  recommendations,  or  to  coordinate  Federal  weather 
modification  programs — have  been  housed  and  supported  within  exec- 
utive departments,  agencies,  or  offices.  The  program  whereby  Federal 
and  non-Federal  U.S.  weather  modification  activities  are  reported  to 
the  Government  is  administered  by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmos- 
pheric Administration  (NOAA)  within  the  Commerce  Department. 
The  State  Department  negotiates  agreements  with  other  nations  which 
might  be  affected  by  U.S.  experiments  and  has  arranged  for  Federal 
agencies  and  other  U.S.  investigators  to  participate  in  international 
meteorological  projects,  including  those  in  weather  modification.  In 
the  United  Nations,  the  United  States  has  been  active  in  promoting  the 
adoption  of  a  treaty  banning  weather  modification  as  a  military 
weapon. 

In  accordance  with  the  mandates  of  several  public  laws  or  self-ini- 
tiated bv  the  agencies  or  interagency  committees,  the  executive  branch 
of  the  Federal  Government  has  undertaken  a  number  of  major  weather 
modification  policy  studies  over  the  past  25  years.  Each  of  the  com- 
pleted major  studies  was  followed  by  a  report  which  included  findings 
and  recommendations.  The  most  recent  study  is  the  one  noted  earlier 
that  is  being  conducted  by  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board 
on  behalf  of  the  Secretarv  of  Commerce,  pursuant  to  requirements  of 
the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976.  Nearly  all 
previous  studies  emphasized  the  needs  for  designation  of  a  lead  agency, 
increased  basic  meteorological  research,  increased  funding,  improve- 
ment of  support  and  cooperation  from  agencies,  and  consideration  of 
legal,  socioeconomic,  environmental,  and  international  aspects.  Other 
recommendations  have  included  improvement  of  program  evaluation, 
studv  of  inadvertent  effects,  increased  regulation  of  activities,  and  a 
number  of  specific  research  projects.  Although  some  of  the  recom- 
mended activities  have  been  undertaken,  many  have  not  resulted  in 
specific  actions  to  date.  Almost  invariably  it  was  pointed  out  in  the 
studies  that  considerable  progress  would  result  from  increased  fund- 
ing. Although  funding  for  weather  modification  research  has  increased 
over  t  he  past  20  years,  most  funding  recommendations  have  been  for 
considerably  higher  levels  than  those  provided.  Since  fiscal  year  1976, 
the  total  Federal  research  funding  for  weather  modification  research 
hn=.  in  fact,  decreased. 

Most  States  in  the  Nation  have  some  official  interest  in  weather 
modification  ;  29  of  them  have  some  form  of  law  which  relates  to  such 
activities,  usually  concerned  with  various  facets  of  regulation  or  con- 
trol of  operations  within  the  Slate  and  sometimes  pertaining  to  au- 
thorization for  funding  research  and/or  operations  at  the  State  or 
local  level.  A  State's  weather  modification  law  usually  reflects  its  gen- 
eral policy  toward  weather  modification;  some  State  laws  tend  to  en- 


XXV 


courage  development  and  use  of  the  technology,  while  others  dis- 
courage such  activities. 

The  current  legal  regime  regulating  weather  modification  has  been 
developed  by  the  States  rather  than  the  Federal  Government,  except 
in  the  areas  of  research  support,  commissioning  studies,  and  requiring 
reporting  of  activities.  The  various  regulatory  and  management  func- 
tions which  the  States  perform  include:  (1)  issuance,  renewal,  sus- 
pension, and  revocation  of  licenses  and  permits;  (2)  monitoring  and 
collecting  of  information  on  activities  through  requirements  to  main- 
tain records,  submission  of  periodic  activity  reports,  and  inspection 
of  premises  and  equipment;  (3)  funding  and  managing  of  State  or 
locally  organized  operational  and/or  research  programs ;  (4)  evalua- 
tion and  advisory  services  to  locally  organized  public  and  private  op- 
erational programs  within  the  State;  and  (5)  miscellaneous  admin- 
istrative activities,  including  the  organization  and  operation  of  State 
agencies  and  boards  which  are  charged  with  carrying  out  statutory 
responsibilities.  Administration  of  the  regulatory  and  managerial  re- 
sponsibilities pertaining  to  weather  modification  within  the  States  is 
accomplished  through  an  assortment  of  institutional  structures,  in- 
cluding departments  of  water  or  natural  resources,  commissions,  and 
special  governing  or  advisory  groups.  Often  there  is  a  combination  of 
two  or  more  of  these  agencies  or  groups  in  a  State,  separating  func- 
tions of  pure  administration  from  those  of  appeals,  permitting,  or  ad- 
visory services. 

Involvement  in  weather  modification  operational  and  research  pro- 
grams varies  from  State  to  State.  Some  support  research  only,  while 
others  fund  and  operate  both  research  and  operational  programs.  In 
some  cases  funding  only  is  provided  to  localities,  usually  at  the  county 
level,  where  operational  programs  have  been  established.  The  recent 
1976-77  drought  led  some  Western  States  to  initiate  emergency  cloud- 
seeding  programs  as  one  means  of  augmenting  diminishing  water  sup- 
plies. Research  conducted  by  atmospheric  and  other  scientists  at  State 
universities  or  other  research  agencies  may  be  supported  in  part  with 
State  funds  but  is  often  funded  by  one  of  the  major  Federal  weather 
modification  programs,  such  as  that  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  or 
the  National  Science  Foundation.  In  a  few  cases.  States  contribute 
funds  to  a  Federal  research  project  which  is  conducted  jointly  with 
the  States  and  partly  within  their  borders. 

In  1975,  1976,  and  1977,  respectively,  there  were  58,  61,  and  88  non- 
federally  supported  weather  modification  projects,  nearly  all  opera- 
tional, conducted  throughout  the  United  States.  These  projects  were 
sponsored  by  community  associations,  airlines,  utilities,  private  in- 
terests, municipal  districts,  cities,  and  States.  Eighty-five  percent  of 
all  projects  in  the  United  States  during  1975  were  carried  out  west  of 
Kansas  City,  with  the  largest  number  in  California.  In  that  State 
there  were  11  proipets  in  each  of  the  vears  1975  and  1976,  and  20 
projects  during  1977.  The  majority  of  these  operational  projects  were 
designed  to  increase  precipitation;  others  were  intended  for  sup- 
pression of  hail  or  dispersal  of  fogs,  the  latter  principally  at  airports. 

In  most  instances,  the  principal  beneficiaries  of  weather  modification 
are  the  local  or  regional  users,  who  include  farmers  and  ranchers, 
weather-related  industries,  municipalities,  airports,  and  utilities — 


XXVI 


those  individuals  and  groups  whose  economic  well-being  and  whose 
lives  and  property  are  directly  subject  to  adverse  consequences  of 
drought  or  other  severe  weather.  It  is  at  the  local  level  where  the  need 
to  engage  in  weather  modification  is  most  keenly  perceived  and  also 
where  possible  negative  effects  from  such  activities  are  most  apparent 
to  some  sectors  of  the  population.  It  follows  that  both  the  greatest  sup- 
port and  the  strongest  opposition  to  weather  modification  projects  are 
focussed  at  the  local  level.  The  popularity  of  a  particular  project  and 
the  degree  of  controversy  surrounding  it  are  frequently  determined  by 
the  extent  to  which  local  citizens  and  local  organizations  have  had  a 
voice  in  the  control  or  funding  of  the  project.  At  the  local  level,  deci- 
sions to  implement  or  to  withdraw  from  a  project  can  most  often  be 
made  with  minimum  social  stress.  Indeed,  studies  have  shown  that  most 
people  are  of  the  opinion  that  local  residents  or  local  government  offi- 
cials should  make  decisions  on  whether  or  not  to  use  weather  modifica- 
tion technology  in  a  given  situation. 

Many  of  the  operational  weather  modification  services  provided  for 
private  groups  and  governmental  bodies  within  the  States  are  carried 
out  under  contract  by  commercial  firms  who  have  developed  expertise 
in  a  broad  range  of  capabilities  or  who  specialize  in  particular  services 
essential  to  both  operational  or  research  projects.  Contracts  may  cover 
only  one  season  of  the  year,  but  a  number  of  them  are  renewed  an- 
nually, with  target  areas  ranging  from  a  few  hundred  to  a  few  thou- 
sand square  miles.  In  197G,  6  of  the  10  major  companies  having 
substantial  numbers  of  contracts  received  about  $2.7  million  for  op- 
erations in  the  United  States,  and  a  few  of  these  companies  also  had 
contracts  overseas.  Owing  to  increased  demand  for  emergency  pro- 
grams during  the  recent  drought,  it  is  estimated  that  1977  contracts 
totaled  about  $3.5  million. 

The  initial  role  of  the  private  weather  modification  operators  was  to 
sustain  activities  during  the  early  years,  when  there  was  often  heated 
scientific  controversy  with  other  meteorologists  over  the  efficacy  of 
cloud  seeding.  Later,  their  operations  provided  a  valuable  data  base 
which  permitted  the  early  evaluation  of  seeding  efforts  and  estimates 
of  potential  prospects  for  the  technology,  meanwhile  growing  in  com- 
petence and  public  respect.  Today,  more  often  than  not,  they  work 
hand  in  hand  with  researchers  and,  in  fact,  they  often  participate  in 
research  projects,  contributing  much  of  their  knowhow  acquired 
through  their  unique  experiences. 

Important  among  private  institutions  concerned  with  weather  modi- 
fication are  the  professional  organizations  of  which  research  and  op- 
erational weather  modifiers  and  other  interested  meteorologists  are 
members.  These  include  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  the 
Weather  Modifical ion  Association,  and  the  Irrigation  and  Drainage 
Division  of  the  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers.  Through  the 
meetings  and  publications  of  these  organizations  the  scientific,  tech- 
nical, and  legal  problems  and  findings  on  weather  modification  are 
aired  and  discussed.  These  groups  also  address  other  matters  such  as 
statements  of  weather  modification  policy,  opinions  on  pending  legis- 
lation, social  implieations.  and  professional  standards  and  certifica- 
tion. Tn  addition,  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modifica- 
tion Council  is  an  organizai  ion  whose  membership  consists  of  govern- 


XXVII 


ments  of  U.S.  States  and  Canadian  Provinces  and  the  Government  of 
Mexico,  which  serves  as  a  forum  for  interstate  coordination  and  ex- 
change of  information  on  weather  modification. 

Weather  modification  is  often  controversial,  and  both  formal  and 
informal  opposition  groups  have  been  organized  in  various  sections 
of  the  country.  Reasons  for  such  opposition  are  varied  and  are  based 
on  both  real  and  perceived  adverse  consequences  from  weather  modifi- 
cation. Sometimes  with  little  or  no  rational  basis  there  are  charges 
by  these  groups  that  otherwise  unexplained  and  usually  unpleasant 
weather- related  events  are  linked  to  cloud  seeding.  There  are  also  cases 
where  some  farmers  are  economically  disadvantaged  through  receiving 
more,  or  less  than  optimum  rainfall  for  their  particular  crops,  when 
artificial  inducement  of  such  conditions  may  have  indeed  been  planned 
to  benefit  those  growing  different  crops  with  different  moisture  re- 
quirements. Opposition  groups  are  often  formed  to  protect  the  legiti- 
mate rights  of  farmers  under  such  circumstances. 

While  the  United  States  is  the  apparent  leader  in  weather  modifi- 
cation research  and  operations,  other  countries  have  also  been  active. 
Information  on  foreign  weather  modification  activities  is  not  uni- 
formly documented  and  is  not  always  available.  In  an  attempt  to 
assemble  uniform  weather  modification  activities  information  of  its 
member  nations,  the  World  Meteorological  Organization  (WMO)  in 
1975  instigated  a  system  of  reporting  and  of  maintaining  a  register  on 
such  activities.  Under  this  arrangement  25  nations  reported  weather 
modification  projects  during  1976,  and  16  countries  provided  similar 
information  in  1975.  The  largest  weather  modification  effort  outside 
the  United  States  is  in  the  Soviet  Union,  where  there  are  both  a  con- 
tinuing research  program  and  an  expanding  operational  program.  The 
latter  is  primarily  a  program  designed  to  reduce  crop  damage  from 
hail,  the  largest  such  effort  in  the  world,  covering  about  5  million 
hectares  (15  million  acres)  in  1976.  Other  countries  with  weather  modi- 
fication programs  of  some  note  include  Canada,  Israel,  Mexico,  and 
the  People's  Republic  of  China.  Projects  in  Rhodesia  and  the  Republic 
of  South  Africa  are  not  reported  through  the  WMO  register  since 
these  countries  are  not  WMO  member  nations. 

Recent  years  have  seen  increased  international  awareness  of  the 
potential  benefits  and  possible  risks  of  weather  modification  technology 
and  increased  international  efforts  to  control  such  activities.  The  major 
efforts  of  the  international  community  in  this  area  are  to  encourage 
and  maintain  the  high  level  of  cooperation  which  currently  exists  in 
weather  prediction  and  research  and  to  insure  that  man's  new  abilities 
will  be  used  for  peaceful  purposes.  There  has  been  exchange  of  ideas 
on  weather  modification  through  international  conferences  and 
through  more  informal  exchanges  of  scientists  and  research  documents. 
As  with  many  scientific  disciplines,  however,  the  problems  arising 
from  use  of  and  experiments  with  weather  modification  are  not  just 
scientific  in  nature,  but  are  political  problems  as  well. 

In  addition  to  the  problems  of  potential  damage  to  countries  through 
commercial  or  experimental  weather  modification  activities,  another 
growing  area  of  concern  is  that  weather  modification  will  be  used  for 
hostile  purposes  and  that  the  future  will  bring  weather  warfare  be- 
tween nations.  The  United  States  has  already  been  involved  in  one 


XXVIII 


such  instance  during  the  Vietnam  war  when  attempts  were  made  to 
impede  traffic  by  increasing  rainfall  during  the  monsoon  season.  In  the 
future,  even  the  perception  that  weather  modification  techniques  are 
available  or  in  use  could  lead  to  an  increase  in  international  tensions. 
Natural  drought  in  a  region,  or  any  other  natural  disaster  will  be 
suspect  or  blamed  on  an  enemy. 

In  light  of  these  problems  the  international  community  has  made 
scattered  attempts  both  to  further  the  study  of  weather  and  its  modifi- 
cation and  to  insure  the  peaceful  use  of  this  new  technology.  One  such 
attempt  was  the  development  of  the  Convention  on  the  Prohibition 
of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification 
Techniques,  which  was  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  United 
Nations  and  opened  for  signature  on  May  18. 19TT,  at  which  time  it  was 
signed  by  the  United  States  and  33  other  nations  (though  it  has  not 
yet  been  submitted  to  the  U.S.  Senate  for  ratification) .  Another  exam- 
ple of  promotion  of  peaceful  use  of  weather  modification  is  the  Pre- 
cipitation Enhancement  Program,  sponsored  by  the  WMQ,  whose  aim 
is  to  plan,  set  up,  and  carry  out  an  international,  scientifically  con- 
trolled precipitation  experiment  in  a  semiarid  region  of  the  world 
under  conditions  where  the  chances  are  optimal  for  increasing  pre- 
cipitation in  sufficient  amounts  to  produce  economic  benefits. 

The  United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human  Environment,  held 
in  June  1972  in  Stockholm,  has  been  the  pivotal  point  in  much  recent 
international  environmental  activity.  It  too  has  been  an  important 
catalyst  in  international  activities  relating  to  weather  modification 
through  portions  of  its  "Declaration,"  its  "Action  Plan  for  the  Human 
Environment,"  its  "Earthwatch  Program,"  and  its  "Study  of  Man's 
Impact  on  Climate." 

Legal  issues  in  weather  modification  are  complex  and  unsettled. 
They  can  be  considered  in  at  least  four  broad  categories :  private  rights 
in  the  clouds,  liability  for  weather  modification,  interstate  legal  issues, 
and  international  legal  issues.  Since  the  body  of  law  on  weather  modi- 
fication is  slight,  existing  case  law  offers  few  guidelines  to  determine 
these  issues.  Regarding  the  issue  of  private  rights  in  the  clouds,  there 
is  no  general  statutory  determination  of  ownership  of  atmospheric 
water,  so  it  is  often  necessary  to  use  analogies  to  some  general  common 
law  doctrines  pertaining  to  water  distribution,  although  each  such 
doctrine  has  its  own  disadvantages  when  applied  to  weather  modifica- 
tion. Some  State  laws  reserve  ownership  or  right  to  use  atmospheric 
water  to  the  State. 

Issues  of  liability  for  damage  may  arise  when  drought,  flooding, 
or  other  severe  weal  her  phenomena  occur  following  attempts  to  modify 
the  weather.  Such  issues  include  causation,  nuisance,  strict  liability, 
trespass,  negligence,  and  charges  of  pollution  of  the  air  and  water 
through  introduction  of  artificial  nucleants.  Statutes  of  10  States  dis- 
cuss weather  modification  liability:  however,  there  is  much  variation 
among  the  specific  provisions  of  the  laws  in  those  States.  Before  a 
case  can  be  made  for  liability  based  on  causation,  it  must  be  pro\en 
that  the  adverse  weather  conditions  were  indeed  induced  by  the  wen:  r 
modifier;  but,  in  fact,  no  one  lias  ever  been  able  to  establish  causation 
of  damages  through  such  activities  in  view  of  the  scientific  uncer- 
tainties of  weather  modification. 


XXIX 


Significant  issues  may  arise  when  weather  modification  activities 
conducted  in  one  State  affect  another  State  as  well.  There  may  be,  for 
example,  the  claim  that  seeding  in  one  State  has  removed  from  the 
clouds  water  that  should  have  fallen  in  an  adjacent  State  or  that 
excessive  flooding  resulted  from  cloud  seeding  in  a  State  upwind. 
Operation  of  cloud-seeding  equipment  near  the  border  of  one  State 
may  also  violate  local  or  State  regulations  or  prohibitions  of  such 
operations  in  that  State.  There  have  been  some  attempts  to  resolve  these 
and  other  issues  through  specific  legislation  in  some  States  and  through 
informal  bilateral  agreements.  While  no  formal  compacts  currently 
exist,  some  compacts  allocating  waters  in  interstate  streams  may  be 
applicable. 

Because  atmospheric  processes  operate  independent  of  national 
borders,  weather  modification  is  inherently  of  international  concern, 
and.  international  legal  issues  have  similarities  to  domestic  interstate 
activities  and  dangers.  Whereas  domestic  weather  modification  law  is 
confused  and  unsettled,  international  law  in  this  area  is  barely  in  the 
formative  stage.  In  time,  ramifications  of  weather  modification  may 
lead  to  major  international  controversy. 

Whereas  the  potential  for  long-term  economic  gains  through  weather 
modification  cannot  be  denied,  current  economic  analyses  are  tenuous  in 
view  of  present  uncertainty  of  the  technology  and  the  complex  nature 
of  attendant  legal  and  economic  problems.  Economic  evaluation  of 
weather  modification  activities  has  therefore  been  limited  to  special, 
localized  cases,  such  as  the  dispersal  of  cold  fog  at  airports,  where 
benefit-cost  ratios  greater  than  5  to  1  have  been  realized  through  sav- 
ings in  delayed  or  diverted  traffic.  It  has  also  been  estimated,  on  the 
basis  of  a  15-percent  increase  in  snowpack  through  seeding  orographic 
clouds,  that  about  2  million  additional  acre-feet  of  water  per  year 
could  be  produced  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin,  at  a  cost  of  about 
$1.50  per  acre-foot. 

Costs  of  most  weather  modification  operations  are  generally  small 
in  relation  to  other  costs  in  agriculture,  for  example,  and  are  normally 
l>elieved  to  be  only  a  fraction  of  the  benefits  which  could  be  achieved 
from  successful  operations.  However,  if  all  the  benefits  and  all  the  costs 
are  considered,  benefit-cost  ratios  may  be  diminished.  While  direct  co«ts 
and  benefits  from  weather  modification  are  reasonably  apparent,  in- 
direct costs  and  benefits  are  elusive  and  require  further  study  of 
sociological,  legal,  and  ecological  implications. 

There  are  numerous  cases  of  both  real  and  perceived  economic  losses 
which  one  or  more  sectors  of  the  public  may  suffer  while  another 
group  is  seeking  economic  advantage  through  some  form  of  weather 
modification.  Overall  benefits  from  weather  modification  are  accord- 
ingly reduced  when  net  gains  are  determined  from  such  instances  of 
mixed  economic  advantages  and  disadvantages.  In  fact,  when  mecha- 
nisms are  established  for  compensating  those  who  have  suffered  losses 
resultinof  from  weather  modification,  benefits  to  those  groups  seeking 
economic  gain  through  such  projects  will  probably  be  accordingly 
reduced. 

Economically  significant  weather  modification  activities  will  have 
an  eventual  ecological  effect,  though  appearance  of  that  effect  may  be 
hidden  or  delayed  by  system  resilience  and/or  confused  by  system 


XXX 


complexity.  Prediction  of  ecological  effects  may  never  be  possible  with 
any  precision;  however,  the  greater  the  precision  with  which  the 
weather  modifier  can  predict  results  of  his  activities,  the  more  pre- 
cisely can  the  ecologist  predict  ecological  effects.  Such  effects  will 
rarely  be  sudden  or  catastrophic,  but  will  result  from  moderate 
weather-related  shifts  in  rates  of  reproduction,  growth,  and  mortality 
of  plants  and  animals.  Adjustments  of  plant  and  animal  communities 
will  thus  occur  more  slowly  in  regions  of  highly  variable  weather  than 
in  those  with  more  uniform  conditions  which  are  slowly  changing  with 
some  regularity  over  time.  Deliberate  weather  modification,  such  as 
precipitation  augmentation,  is  likely  to  have  a  greater  ecological  im- 
pact in  semi-arid  regions  than  in  humid  ones. 

Widespread  cloud  seeding,  using  silver  iodide,  could  result  in  esti- 
mated local,  temporary  increases  in  silver  concentrations  in  precipita- 
tion approaching  those  in  natural  waters,  but  exchange  rates  would  be 
an  order  of  magnitude  lower  than  the  natural  exchange  rates.  Ex- 
change rates  will  likely  be  many  orders  of  magnitude  less  than  those 
rates  at  which  plants  and  soils  are  adversely  affected. 

Conclusions 

1.  Weather  modification  is  an  emerging  technology ;  there  is  a  wide 
spectrum  of  capabilities  to  modify  various  weather  phenomena,  rang- 
ing from  the  operational  readiness  of  cold  fog  dispersal  to  little  prog- 
ress beyond  initial  research  in  the  case  of  modifying  severe  storms 
such  as  hurricanes. 

2.  Along  with  cold  fog  dispersal,  the  only  other  weather  modifica- 
tion capability  showing  near  readiness  for  application  is  the  aug- 
mentation of  winter  snowpack  through  seeding  mountain  cloud  sys- 
tems. A  probable  increase  of  about  15  percent  is  indicated  by  a  number 
of  experiments  and  longrunning  operational  seeding  projects  in  the 
western  United  States. 

3.  Most  scientists  and  weather  modification  operators  agree  that 
there  is  continued  need  for  a  wide  range  of  research  and  development 
activity  both  to  refine  weather  modification  techniques  where  there 
has  been  some  success  and  to  advance  capabilities  in  modifying  other 
weather  phenomena  where  there  has  been  much  less  or  little  progress. 

4.  Current  Federal  policy  for  weather  modification  research  and 
development  follows  the  mission-oriented  approach,  where  each  agency 
charged  with  responsibility  for  dealing  with  a  particular  national 
problem  is  given  latitude  to  seek  the  best  approach  or  solution  to  the 
problem;  this  approach  or  solution  may  involve  weather  modification. 

5.  The  structure  of  Federal  organization  for  weather  modification 
reflects  the  mission-oriented  approach  which  is  characteristic  of  the 
current  Federal  policy,  the  programs  loosely  coordinated  through  ad- 
visory groups  and  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric 
Sciences. 

0.  The  interest  of  the  Congress  in  weather  modification  has  been 
shown  by  the  introduction  of  110  bills  related  to  the  subject  since 
1017 — 0  of  which  have  become  public  law — and  the  consideration  of  22 
resolutions  on  weather  modification,  one  of  which  was  passed  by  the 
Senate. 

7.  A  number  of  major  weather  modification  policy  studies  have  been 
directed  by  public  law  or  initiated  within  the  executive  branch  over 


xxxr 


the  past  25  years ;  most  of  these  studies  recommended  designation  of 
a  lead  agency,  increased  basic  meteorological  research,  increased  fund- 
ing, improvement  of  support  and  cooperation  from  agencies,  and  con- 
sideration of  legal,  socioeconomic,  environmental,  and  international 
aspects.  Although  some  recommended  actions  have  been  undertaken, 
others  have  not  seen  specific  action  to  date. 

8.  While  major  policy  studies  have  recommended  increased  funding 
for  Federal  weather  modification,  research  and  development  and  fund- 
ing has  generally  increased  over  the  past  20  years,  recommended  levels 
have  been  consistently  higher  than  those  provided,  and  funding  has 
actually  decreased  since  fiscal  year  1976. 

9.  With  enactment  of  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy 
Act  of  1976  and  completion  of  the  major  policy  study  mandated  by 
that  act,  there  is  a  fresh  opportunity  for  the  Congress  to  assess  the 
potential  usefulness  and  problems  in  application  of  weather  modifica- 
tion technology  and  to  establish  a  new  Federal  policy  for  weather 
modification  research  and  operations. 

10.  The  principal  role  in  regulating  weather  modification  and  in 
supporting  operational  programs  has  been  taken  by  the  States,  while 
the  role  of  the  Federal  Government  has  been  support  of  research  and 
development  programs. 

11.  The  majority  of  the  States  (29)  have  some  form  of  law  which 
relates  to  weather  modification,  and  the  general  policy  of  a  State 
toward  weather  modification  is  usually  reflected  in  the  weather  modi- 
fication law  of  that  State ;  laws  of  some  States  tend  to  encourage  devel- 
opment and  use  of  the  technology,  while  others  discourage  such 
activities. 

12.  The  majority  of  operational  weather  modification  projects  in  the 
United  States  (58  of  a  total  of  72,  or  80  percent  in  calendar  year  1975) 
are  conducted  west  of  Kansas  City,  and  the  largest  number  of  projects 
has  been  in  California  (20  during  1977) ;  most  operational  projects 
are  intended  to  increase  precipitation,  while  others  are  designed  to 
suppress  hail  or  disperse  fog. 

13.  Both  the  greatest  support  and  the  strongest  opposition  to  weather 
modification  projects  are  focused  at  the  local  level,  where  the  economic 
and  personal  interests  of  local  organizations  and  individuals  are  most 
directly  affected;  it  follows  that  there  is  also  the  least  social  stress 
when  decisions  to  apply  or  withhold  weather  modification  are  made 
at  the  local  level. 

14.  Commercial  weather  modification  operators  have  substained  ac- 
tivities since  the  early  days,  after  which  some  operations  fell  into 
disrepute,  providing  a  valuable  data  base  for  evaluation  of  long-term 
projects  and  developing  expertise  over  a  broad  range  of  capabilities: 
most  have  incorporated  improvements  into  their  technology  as  they 
have  benefited  from  accumulated  experience  and  from  research  results. 

15.  While  the  United  States  is  the  apparent  leader  in  overall  research 
and  operational  weather  modification  activities,  there  have  been  ap- 
proximately 20  foreign  countries  in  which  activities  are  conducted  an- 
nually (25  countries  reported  such  projects  for  1976  through  the 
register  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization)  ;  the  largest  for- 
eign program  is  that  of  the  Soviet  Union,  whose  operational  hail 
suppression  program  covered  about  15  million  acres  in  1976,  the  largest 
such  effort  in  the  world. 


XXXII 


16.  The  international  community  has  attempted  to  further  the  study 
o  f  weather  modification  and  insure  its  peaceful  use  through  the  recent 
development  of  a  Convention  on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any 
Other  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Techniques  (adopted  by  the 
U.N.  General  Assembly  and  opened  for  signature  in  May  1977)  and 
through  sponsorship  by  the  World  Meteorological  Organization  of 
an  international  precipitation  enhancement  program. 

17.  Legal  issues  in  weather  modification  are  complex  and  unsettled; 
they  include  resolution  of  problems  of  ownership  of  atmospheric  water, 
issues  of  liability,  conflicting  statutes  and  regulations  of  respective 

e  laws,  and  the  need  to  develop  a  regime  of  relevant  international 

law. 

18.  Although  the  long-term  potential  for  economic  gains  through 
weather  modification  cannot  be  denied,  attempts  to  quantify  benefits 
mnd  costs  from  such  activities  will  in  most  cases  be  difficult  to  undertake 
on  a  practical  basis  until  the  technology  is  more  highly  developed  and 
control  systems  are  perfected  to  permit  reliable  predictions  of 
outcomes. 

19.  Economically  significant  wreather  modification  will  always  have 
an  eventual  ecological  effect,  though  appearance  of  the  effect  may  be 
delayed  or  hidden  by  system  resilience  and/or  confounded  by  system 
complexity ;  the  more  precisely  the  weather  modifier  can  specify  effects 
lie  will  produce,  the  more  precise  can  be  the  ecologist's  prediction  of 
likely  ecological  effects. 

20.  Modification  processes  may  also  be  initiated  or  triggered  inad- 
vertently rather  than  purposefully ;  man  is  already  causing  measurable 
variations  unintentionally  on  the  local  scale,  and  artificial  climate 
effects  have  been  observed  on  local  and  regional  scales.  Although  not 
veri  fiable  at  present,  the  time  may  not  be  remote  when  human  activities 
will  result  in  measurable  large-scale  changes  in  weather  and  climate 
of  more  than  passing  significance. 


CHAPTER  1 


INTRODUCTION  AND  SUMMARY  OF  ISSUES 

(I?y  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Perspective 

uIt  is  entirely  possible,  were  he  wise  enough,  that  man  could  produce 
favorable  effects,  perhaps  of  enonnous  practical  significance,  trans- 
forming his  environment  to  render  it  more  salutary  for  his  purposes. 
This  is  certainly  a  matter  which  should  be  studied  assiduously  and 
explored  vigorously.  The  first  steps  are  clear.  In  order  to  control 
meteorological  matters  at  all  we  nee  d  to  understand  them  better  than 
we  now  do.  When  we  understand  fully  ice  can  at  least  predict  weather 
with  assurance  for  reasonable  intervals  in  the  future. 

''With  modem  analytical  devices,  with  a  team  of  sound  background 
and  high  skills,  it  is  possible  today  to  do  a  piece  of  work  in  this  field 
which  will  render  immediate  benefits,  and  carry  us  for  toward  a  more 
thorough  understanding  of  ultimate  possibilities.  By  all  means  let  us 
get  at  it." 

— Vanne var  Bush  1 

SITUATION 

Two  decades  after  completion  of  a  major  study  and  report  on 
weather  modification  by  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control 
and  after  the  assertions  quoted  above,  many  would  agree  that  some 
of  the  more  fundamental  questions  about  understanding  and  using 
weather  modification  remain  unsolved.  There  is  a  great  difference  of 
opinion,  however,  on  the  state  of  technology  in  this  field.  According 
to  Grant,  "Some  believe  that  weather  modification  is  now  ready  for 
widespread  application.  In  strong  contrast,  others  hold  that  applica- 
tion of  the  technology  may  never  be  possible  or  practical  on  any 
substantial  scale."  2  It  has  been  demonstrated  that  at  least  some  atmos- 
pheric phenomena  can  be  modified  with  some  degree  of  predictable 
success,  as  a  consequence  of  seeding  supercooled  clouds  with  artificial 
ice  nuclei,  and  there  is  some  promise  that  the  present  technology  will 
be  expanded  to  include  a  greater  scope  of  weather  modification  capa- 
bilities. Nevertheless,  a  systematic  approach  and  reasonable  progress 
in  development  of  weather  modification  technology  have  been  impeded 
by  a  number  of  problems. 

Changnon  asserts  that  a  continuing  and  overriding  problem  restrict- 
ing progress  has  been  the  attempt  to  apply  an  ill-defined  technology 
to  increase  rain  or  suppress  hail  without  an  adequate  scientific  under- 

1  From  statement  of  Dec.  2,  1957,  quoted  in  final  report  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Weather  Control,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1958.  vol.  I.  p.  1. 

2  Grant,  Lewis  O.,  "Scientific  and  Other  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modification.  In 
William  A.  Thomas  (editor),  Legal  and  Scientific  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modification. 
Proceedings  of  a  symposium  convened  at  Duke  University.  Mar.  11-3  2.  1976,  by  the 
National  Conference  of  Lawyers  and  Scientists,  Durham,  N.C.,  Duke  University  Press, 
1977,  p.  7. 

(1) 

34-857—79  3 


2 


standing  and  predictable  outcome.3  Experimentation  has  been  poorly 
conducted,  intermittent,  or  too  short ;  and  "results  have  not  been  inte- 
grated with  those  of  other  projects  so  as  to  develop  a  continuing  thread 
of  improving  knowledge."  4 

In  response  to  the  query  as  to  why  progress  in  weather  modification 
lias  been  so  slow,  Fleagle  identifies  three  broad,  general  impediments. 
"First,  the  physical  processes  associated  with  clouds  have  turned  out  to 
be  especially  complex  and  difficult  *  *  *.  A  second  possibility  may  be 
that  the  atmosphere  is  inherently  stable,  so  that  within  broad  limits,  no 
matter  what  we  do  to  increase  precipitation,  the  results  are  likely  to  be 
small  and  roughly  the  same  *  *  *.  A  third  reason  *  *  *  is  that  progress 
has  been  hamstrung  by  fragmentation  of  resources,  by  submarginal 
funding,  ineffective  planning  and  coordination,  and  a  general  lack  of 
administrative  toughness  and  fiscal  stability."  5 

Droessler  points  out  the  need  to  "formulate  a  comprehensive  national 
weather  modification  policy  which  has  the  broad  support  of  the  scien- 
tific community,  the  general  public,  private  industry,  and  the  Govern- 
ment," contending  that  "the  greatest  deterrent  in  getting  on  with  the 
task  of  preparing  a  satisfactory  national  policy  is  the  lack  of  a  con- 
sensus about  the  national  goals  for  weather  modification."  6 

Although  operational  readiness  varies  from  one  form  of  weather 
modification  to  another,  as  a  result  of  the  degree  of  understanding  and 
the  complexity  of  decisionmaking  in  given  situations,  the  prospects  for 
successful  weather  modification  are  sufficiently  promising  that  at- 
tempts to  develop  effective  applications  will  continue.  This  was  one  of 
the  major  areas  of  co?isensus  at  a  recent  symposium  on  the  uncertainties 
of  weather  modification : 

There  will  be  increased  attempts  to  modify  weather,  both  because  people  tend 
to  do  what  is  technically  possible  and  because  the  anticipated  benefits  of  precipi- 
tation augmentation,  hail  or  lightning  suppression,  hurricane  diversion,  and  other 
activities  often  exceed  the  associated  costs.7 

With  the  inevitable  increases  in  weather  modification  capabilities 
and  the  increasing  application  of  these  capabilities,  the  development  of 
a  technology  that  is  socially  useful  must  be  insured  through  a  careful 
analysis  of  attendant  benefits  and  disbenefits.  According  to  Fleagle. 
et  al..  deliberate  efforts  to  modify  the  weather  have  thus  far  had  only 
marginal  societal  impacts;  however,  as  future  activities  expand,  "they 
will  probably  be  accompanied  by  secondary  effects  which  in  many 
instances  cannot  be  anticipated  in  detail  *  *  *."  Consequently,  "rational 
policy  decisions  are  urgently  needed  to  insure  that  activities  are  di- 
rected toward  socially  useful  goals."  8 

The  lack  of  a  capability  to  deal  with  impending  societal  problems 

8  Changnori,  Stanley  A..  Jr..  "The  Federal  Role  In  Weather  Modification."  bgckgrbund 
paper  prepared  for  use  by  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advi- 
sory Board.  Mar.  !).  3  077,  p.  5. 

'  Ibid.,  pp.  ">-G. 

s  Fleagle.  Robert  O..  "An  Analysis  of  Federal  Policies  in  Weather  Modification.''  back- 
ground paper  prepared  for  use  by  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification 
Adv:s<  rv  Hoard.  Mar.  1<»77.  pp.  17-18. 

«  Droessler,  Farl  (»..  "Weather  Modification"  (Federal  Policies.  Funding  From  AIT 
Sources  Interagency  Coordination),  background  paper  prepared  for  use  of  the  U.S.  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Mar.  l.  l!>77.  p.  10 

7  Thomas.  William  A.  (editor).  "Legal  and  Scientific  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modifie-i- 
tion,"  proceedings  of  a  Symposium  convened  at  Duke  University.  Mar  11-12.  1970,  by  the 
Vf»'onal  Conference  of  Lawyers  and  Scientists.  Durham,  N.C.,  Dnke  Universitv  Pres., 
1077,  p.  vl. 

Flt*agie.  Robert  r>  •  -lames  A.  Crutchfteld,  Ralph  W.  Johnson,  and  Mohamed  F.  AbdO, 
"Weather  Modification  in  the  PUbllC  Interest."  Seattle,  American  Meteorological  Society 

and  the  University  of  Washington  Press,  i<>73.  p.  3,  31-32. 


3 


and  emerging  management  issues  in  weather  modification  has  been 
aphoristically  summed  up  in  the  following  statement  by  Crutchfield: 

Weather  modification  is  in  the  throes  of  a  serious  schizoid  process  The  slow 
and  sober  business  of  piecing  together  the  scientific  knowledge  of  weather  proc- 
esses developing  the  capacity  to  model  the  complex  systems  involved,  and  assess- 
ing systematically  the  results  of  modification  efforts  has  led  to  responsible  opti- 
mism about  the  future  of  these  new  technologies.  On  the  other  hand,  the  social 
technology"  of  evaluation,  choice,  and  execution  has  lagged  badly.  Ihe  present  de- 
cisionmaking apparatus  appears  woefully  inadequate  to  the  extraordinarily  ^diffi- 
cult task  of  fitting  weather  modification  into  man  s  pattern  of  life  m  optimal 
fashion  There  are' too  many  game  plans,  too  many  coaches,  and  a  disconcerting 
proclivity  for  running  hard  before  deciding  which  goal  line  to  aim  for— or,  indeed, 
which  field  to  play  on.  ,J  .  .  .  _  . 

Mounting  evidence  indicates  that  weather  modification  of  several  types  is, 
or  may  soon  become  technically  feasible.  That  some  groups  will  derive  economic 
or  other  social  benefits  from  such  technology  is  a  spur  to  action.  But  a  whole 
thunderhead  of  critical  questions  looms  on  the  horizon  waiting  to  be  resolved 
before  any  valid  decisions  can  be  made  about  the  scale,  composition,  location, 
and  management  of  possible  operations.9 

ADVANTAGES 

In  a  study  for  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  Homer  E.  Newell  highlighted  the  potential  benefits  of  inten- 
tional weather  modification  : 

The  Earth's  weather  has  a  profound  influence  on  agriculture,  forestry,  water 
resources,  industry,  commerce,  transportation,  construction,  field  operations, 
commercial  fishing,  and  many  other  human  activities.  Adverse  effects  of  weather 
on  man's  activities  and  the  Earth's  resources  are  extremely  costly,  amounting 
to  billions  of  dollars  per  year,  sometimes  causing  irreparable  damage  as  when 
human  lives  are  lost  in  severe  storms.  There  is,  therefore,  great  motivation 
to  develop  effective  countermeasures  against  the  destructive  effects  of  weather, 
and,  conversely,  to  enhance  the  beneficial  aspects.  The  financial  and  other  ben- 
efits to  human  welfare  of  being  able  to  modify  weather  to  augment  water 
supplies,  reduce  lightning,  suppress  hail,  mitigate  tornadoes,  and  inhibit  the  full 
development  of  hurricanes  would  be  very  great.10 

More  recently.  Louis  J.  Battan  gave  the  following  two  reasons,  with 
graphic  examples,  for  wanting  to  change  the  weather : 

First,  violent  weather  kills  a  great  many  people  and  does  enormous  property 
damage.  A  single  hurricane  that  struck  East  Pakistan  in  Novemlier  1970  killed 
more  than  250,000  people  in  a  single  day.  Hurricane  Camille  hit  the  United  States 
in  1969  and  did  approximately  $1.5  billion  worth  of  damage.  An  outbreak  of 
tornadoes  in  the  Chicago  area  on  Palm  Sunday  of  1965  killed  about  250  people, 
and  the  tornadoes  of  April  1974  did  likewise.  Storms  kill  people  and  damage 
property,  and  it  is  reasonable  to  ask  whether  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  accept 
this  type  of  geophysical  destruction.  I  say,  "No,  it  is  not — it  should  be  possible 
to  do  something." 

Second,  weather  modification  involves,  and  in  some  respects  might  control, 
the  production  of  those  elements  we  need  to  survive.  Water  and  food  are  cur- 
rently in  short  supply  in  many  areas,  and  these  shortages  almost  certainly  will 
be  more  severe  in  the  future.  We  can  develop  new  strains  of  wheat  and  rye  and 
corn  and  soybeans  and  rice,  but  all  is  for  naught  if  the  weather  fails  to  coop- 
erate. If  the  monsoons  do  not  deliver  on  schedule  in  India,  residents  of  that 
country  starve  in  large  numbers.  And  if  the  drought  that  people  have  been 
predicting  for  the  last  several  years  does  spread  over  the  Great  Plains,  there 
will  be  starvation  around  the  world  on  a  scale  never  before  experienced. 

Weather  is  the  one  uncontrollable  factor  in  the  whole  business  of  agriculture. 
Hail,  strong  winds,  and  floods  are  the  scourges  of  agriculture,  and  we  should 
not  have  to  continue  to  remain  helpless  in  the  face  of  them.  It  may  be  impossible 

9  Crntehfielri.  James  A..  "Social  CVoice  and  Weather  Modification  :  Concepts  and  Measure- 
ment of  Impact."  In  W.  R.  Derrick  Sewell  (editor).  Modifying  the  Weather:  a  Social 
Assessment,  Victoria,  British  Columbia.  University  of  Victoria.  1978.  p.  1S7. 

10  Newell.  Homer  E.,  "A  Recommended  National  Program  in  Weather  Modification."  Fed- 
eral Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  ICAS  report  No.  10a,  Washington,  D.C.,  November  1966,  p.  1. 


4 


for  us  to  develop  the  kind  of  technology  we  would  like  to  have  for  modification 
of  weather,  but  to  assume  failure  in  such  an  important  endeavor  is  a  course 
not  to  be  followed  by  wise  men.11 

Specific  statistics  on  annual  losses  of  life  and  economic  losses  from 
property  damages  resulting  from  weather-related  disasters  in  the 
United  States  are  shown  in  table  1,  which  wras  developed  in  a  recent 
study  by  the  Domestic  Council.12  In  the  table,  for  comparison,  are 
the  fiscal  year  1975  expenditures  by  the  Federal  Government  in 
weather  modification  research,  according  to  the  several  categories  of 
weather  phenomena  to  be  modified.  Although  it  is  clear  that  weather 
disasters  can  be  mitigated  only  partially  through  weather  modifica- 
tion, even  if  the  technology  were  fully  developed,  the  potential  value, 
economic  and  otherwise,  should  be  obvious.  The  following  quotation 
from  a  Federal  report  written  over  a  decade  ago  summarizes  the  full 
potential  of  benefits  to  mankind  which  might  be  realized  through  use 
of  this  technology : 

With  advances  in  his  civilization,  man  has  learned  how  to  increase  the  fruit 
of  the  natural  environment  to  insure  a  livelihood.  *  *  *  it  is  fortunate  that 
growing  knowledge  of  the  natural  world  has  given  him  an  increasing  awareness 
of  the  changes  that  are  occurring  in  his  environment  and  a' so  hopefully  some 
means  for  deliberate  modification  of  these  trends.  An  appraisal  of  the  prospects 
for  deliberate  weather  and  climate  modification  can  be  directed  toward  the 
ultimate  goal  of  bringing  use  of  the  environment  into  closer  harmony  with  its 
capacities  and  with  the  purposes  of  man — whether  this  be  for  food  production, 
relief  from  floods,  assuring  the  continuance  of  biologic  species,  stopping  pollu- 
tion, or  for  purely  esthetic  reasons.13 

TABLE  1. — ANNUAL  PROPERTY  DAMAGE  AND  LOSS  OF  LIFE  FROM  WEATHER-RELATED  DISASTERS  AND  HAZARDS 
IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  FISCAL  YEAR  1975  FEDERAL  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  RESEARCH  FUNDING  (FROM 
DOMESTIC  COUNCIL  REPORT,  1975) 


Property  Modification 
damage1  research 

Weather  hazard  Loss  of  life1        (billions)  (millions) 


Hurricanes                                                                                      2  30  2  $rj.  8  3  $o.  8 

Tornadoes  .                                                             2140  2.4  4  1.0 

Hail   5.8  3.9 

Lightning                                                                                    « 110  .1  .4 

Fog                                                                                           M.000  7.5  1.3 

Floods                                                                                          6  240  8  2.3 

Frost  (agriculture)   7  1. 1   

Drought    7.7  93.4 


Total   1,520  6.7  10.8 


1  Sources:  "Assessment  of  Research  on  Natural  Hazards,"  Gilbert  F.  White  and  J.  Eugene  Haas,  the  MIT  Press,  Cam- 
bridge, Mass.,  1975,  pp  68,  286,  305,  374;  "The  Federal  Plan  for  Meteorological  Services  and  Supporting  Research,  Fiscal 
Year  1976,"  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheiic  Administration  (NOAA),  Washington,  D.C., 
April  1975,  p  9;  "Weatheiwise,"  February  1971,  1972,  1973,  1974,  1975,  American  Meteorological  Society,  Boston,  Mass.; 
"Summary  Report  on  Weather  Modification,  Fiscal  Years  1969,  1970,  1971,"  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  NOAA,  Wash- 
ington, D.C.,  May  1973,  pp  72,  81;  "Estimating  Crop  Losses  Due  to  Hail — Wot  king  Data  for  County  Estimates,"  U.S.  De- 
partment of  Agriculture,  Economic  Research  Service,  September  1974;  "Natural  Disasters:  Some  Empirical  and  Economic 
Considerations,"  G.  Thomas  Sav,  National  Bureau  of  Standards,  Washington,  D.C.,  February  1974,  p  19;  Traffic  Safety 
magazine,  National  Safety  Council,  February  1974. 

2  1970-74  average. 

3  These  funds  do  not  include  capital  investment  in  research  aircraft  and  instrumentation  primarily  for  hurricane  modi- 
fication, which  in  fiscal  year  1975  amounted  to  $9,200,000. 

4  These  funds  support  theoretical  research  on  modification  of  extratropical  cloud  systems  and  their  attendant  severe 
storms  such  as  thunderstorms  and  tornadoes. 

5  1973. 

«  1950-72  average. 

7  Average. 

1  1965-69  average. 

9  These  funds  support  precipitation  augmentation  research,  much  of  which  may  not  have  direct  application  to  drought 
alleviation. 


11  Battan,  Louis  J..  "The  Scientific  Uncertainties:  a  Scientisl  Responds."  in  William  A. 
Thomas  (editor),  "Legal  and  Scientific  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modification."  proceed- 
ings of  a  symposium  Convened  at  Duke  University,  .Mar.  11-12,  197©,  by  C  e  National  Con- 
ference of  Lawyers  and  Scientists.  Durham.  N.C.,  Duke  University  Press.  1!)77.  p.  20. 

12  U.S  Domestic  Council.  Environmental  Resources  Committee,  Subcommittee  on  Climate 
Change.  "The  Federal  Rofe  in  Weather  Modification,"  December  i(->~r»,  p.  2. 

u»  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification," 
National  Science  Foundation.  NSF  6G-3,  Washington,  D.C.,  Dec.  20,  1965,  p.  7. 


5 


TIMELINESS 

The  modern  period  in  weather  modification  is  about  three  decades 
old,  dating  from  events  in  1946,  when  Schaefer  and  Langmuir  demon- 
strated that  a  cloud  of  supercooled  water  droplets  could  be  transformed 
into  ice  crystals  when  seeded  with  dry  ice.  Activities  and  interests 
among  scientists,  the  commercial  cloud  seeders,  and  Government  spon- 
sors and  policymakers  have  exhibited  a  nearly  10-year  cyclic  behavior 
over  the  ensuing  years.  Each  of  the  three  decades  since  the  late  1940's 
has  seen  an  initial  burst  of  enthusiasm  and  activity  in  weather  modi- 
fication experiments  and/or  operations;  a  midcourse  period  of  con- 
troversy, reservations,  and  retrenchment;  and  a  final  period  of 
capability  assessment  and  policy  examination,  with  the  issuance  of 
major  Federal  reports  with  comprehensive  recommendations  on  a 
future  course. 

The  first  such  period  ended  with  the  publication  of  the  final  report 
of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control  in  1957.14  In  1959, 
Dr.  Robert  Brode,  then  Associate  Director  of  the  National  Science 
Foundation,  summarized  the  significance  of  that  study  in  a  1959 
congressional  hearing : 

For  4  years  the  Advisory  Committee  studied  and  evaluated  public  and  private 
cloud-seeding  experiments  and  encouraged  programs  aimed  at  developing  both 
physical  and  statistical  evaluation  methods.  The  final  report  of  the  com- 
mittee *  *  *  for  the  first  time  placed  before  the  American  public  a  body  of 
available  facts  and  a  variety  of  views  on  the  status  of  the  science  of  cloud 
physics  and  the  techniques  and  practices  of  cloud  seeding  and  weather  modifica- 
tion.15 

The  year  1966  was  replete  with  Government  weather  modification 
studies,  major  ones  conducted  by  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences, 
the  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification  of  the  National 
Science  Foundation,  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  and  the  Legislative  Reference  Service  of  the  Library 
of  Congress.  During  that  year,  or  thereabouts,  planning  reports  were 
also  produced  by  most  of  the  Federal  agencies  with  major  weather 
modification  programs.  The  significance  of  that  year  of  reevaluatiori 
and  the  timeliness  for  congressional  policy  action  were  expressed  by 
Hartman  in  his  report  to  the  Congress : 

It  is  especially  important  that  a  comprehensive  review  of  weather  modification 
be  undertaken  by  the  Congress  at  this  time,  for  a  combination  of  circumstances 
prevails  that  may  not  be  duplicated  for  many  years.  For  the  first  time  since 
1957  there  now  exists,  in  two  reports  prepared  concurrently  by  the  National 
Academy  of  Sciences  and  a  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification,  created 
by  the  National  Science  Foundation,  a  definitive  appraisal  of  the  entire  scope 
of  this  subject,  the  broad  sweep  of  unsolved  problems  that  are  included,  and 
critical  areas  of  public  policy  that  require  attention.  There  are  currently  before 
the  Congress  several  bills  which  address,  for  the  first  time  since  enactment  of 
Public  Law  85-510.  the  question  of  the  formal  assignment  of  Federal  authority 
to  undertake  weather  modification  programs.  And  there  is  increasing  demand 
throughout  the  country  for  the  benefits  that  weather  modification  may  bring.16 


14  F^tablishment  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control  by  the  Congress  and  its 
actJ^ties  are  discussed  in  following  chapters  on  the  history  of  weather  modification  and 
on  Federal  activities,  chs.  2  and  5,  respectively.  Recommendations  of  the  final  report  are 
summarized  in  ch.  6.  Other  renorts  mentioned  in  the  following  paragraphs  in  this  section 
are  also  discussed  and  referenced  in  chs.  5  and  6.  ■  \ -  .. 

15  U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives.  Committee  on  Science  and  Astronautics. 
"Weather  Modification."  Hearing.  Sfith  Cong..  1st  sess.,  Feb.  16,  1959.  Washington,  JJ.L., 
U.S.  Government  Printing  OfhYp  19^9.  p  3.  .t  _  _ 

16  Hartman,  Lawton  M.  "Weather  Modification  and  Control.'  Library  of  Comrress, 
Legislative  Reference  Service.  Apr.  27.  1966.  Issued  as  a  committee  print  by  the  Senate 
Committee  on  Commerce.  89th  Cone..  2d  sess.,  Senate  Rept.  No.  1139,  Washington, 

U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1966,  p.  1. 


6 


Toward  the  close  of  the  third  decade,  a  number  of  policy  studies  and 
reports  appeared,  starting  in  1973  with  a  second  major  study  by  the 
National  Academy  of  Sciences,  and  including  others  by  the  U.S.  Gen- 
eral Accounting  Office  and  by  the  U.S.  Domestic  Council.  The  major 
study  of  this  period  was  commissioned  by  the  Congress  when  it  enacted 
Public  Law  94-490,  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of 
1976,  in  October  of  1976.  By  that  law  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  was 
directed  to  conduct  a  study  and  to  recommend  the  Federal  policy  and  a 
Federal  research  program  in  weather  modification.  That  study  was 
conducted  on  behalf  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  by  a  Weather  Modi- 
fication Advisory  Board,  appointed  by  the  Secretary,  and  the  required 
report  will  be  transmitted  to  the  Congress  during  1978.  The  importance 
of  that  act  and  its  mandated  study  was  assessed  by  Dr.  Robert  M. 
White,  former  Administrator  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmos- 
pheric Administration  (NOAA),  the  Commerce  Department  agency 
with  administrative  responsibilities  and  research  programs  in  weather 
modification : 

The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  197C>  *  *  *  will  influence 
X(  )AA  to  some  degree  during  the  next  year,  and  its  effect  may  have  a  large  impact 
on  the  agency  and  the  Nation  in  future  years.  The  comprehensive  study  of  and 
report  on  weather  modification  that  will  result  from  our  implementation  of  this 
act  will  provide  guidance  and  recommendations  to  the  President  and  the  Congress 
in  the  areas  of  policy,  research,  and  utilization  of  this  technology.  We  look  to  this 
study  and  report  as  an  opportunity  to  help  set  the  future  course  of  a  controversial 
science  and  technology  with  enormous  potential  for  henefit  to  the  Nation.17 

Thus,  conditions  once  more  are  ripe  and  the  stage  has  been  set,  as  in 
1957  and  again  in  1966,  for  the  Congress  to  act  in  establishing  a  defini- 
tive Federal  weather  modification  policy,  one  appropriate  at  least  for 
the  next  decade  and  perhaps  even  longer.  Among  other  considerations, 
such  a  policy  would  define  the  total  role  of  the  Federal  Government, 
including  its  management  structure,  its  responsibilities  for  research 
and  development  and  for  support  operations,  its  authorities  for  regu- 
lation and  licensing,  its  obligation  to  develop  international  cooperation 
in  research  and  peaceful  applications,  and  its  function  in  the  general 
promotion  of  purposeful  weather  modification  as  an  economically  vi- 
able and  socially  accepted  technology.  On  the  other  hand,  other  factors, 
such  as  constraints  arising  from  public  concern  over  spending,  may 
inhibit  the  development  of  such  policy. 

While  some  would  argue  that  there  exists  no  Federal  policy,  at  least 
one  White  House  official,  in  response  to  a  letter  to  the  President,  made 
a  statement  of  weather  modification  policy  in  1975: 

A  considerable  amount  of  careful  thought  and  study  has  been  devoted  to  the 
subject  of  weather  modification  and  what  the  Federal  role  and.  in  particular,  the 
role  of  various  agencies  should  he  in  (his  area.  As  a  result  of  this  study,  we  have 
developed  a  general  strategy  for  addressing  weather  modification  efforts  which 
we  believe  provides  for  an  appropriate  level  of  coordination. 

We  believe  that  the  agency  which  is  charged  with  the  responsibility  for  dealing 
with  a  particular  national  problem  should  Ite  given  the  latitude  to  seek  the  best 
approach  or  solution  to  the  problem.  In  some  instances  this  may  involve  a  form 
of  weather  modification,  while  in  other  instances  other  approaches  may  be  more 
appropriate. 

While  we  would  certainly  agree  that  some  level  of  coordination  of  weather 
modification  research  efforts  is  logical,  we  do  not  believe  that  a  program  under 


w  CJ.S.  Congress,  Souse  of  Representatives,  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  Sub* 

committi  d  the  EBaTlronmeal  snd  the  Atmosphere.  "Briefing  «"i  the  National  Oceanic  and 

Atmospheric  Administration."  Hearings.  9.1th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  May  17.  18,  1977.  Washing- 
Jon.  I'.S.  Government  Printing  Ollice,  1977.  i».  4-i5. 


7 


the  direction  of  any  one  single  agency's  leadership  is  either  necessary  or  desirable. 
We  have  found  from  our  study  that  the  types  of  scientific  research  conducted  by 
agencies  are  substantially  different  in  approach,  techniques,  and  type  of  equip- 
ment employed,  depending  on  the  particular  weather  phenomena  being  addressed. 
Each  type  of  weather  modification  requires  a  different  form  of  program  manage- 
ment and  there  are  few  common  threads  which  run  along  all  programs.13 

Presumably,  there  will  be  a  resurgence  of  congressional  interest  in 
weather  modification  policy  during  the  first  session  of  the  96th  Con- 
gress, when  the  aforementioned  report  from  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  has  been  reviewed  and  considered.  In  view  of  the  recom- 
mendations in  numerous  recent  studies  and  the  opinions  of  the  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board  (the  group  of  experts  preparing  the  re- 
port for  the  Secretary  of  Commerce) ,  it  seems  unlikely  that  any  action 
by  the  Congress  would  perpetuate  the  policy  expounded  in  the  White 
House  letter  quoted  above. 

It  is  expected  that  this  present  report,  intended  as  an  overall  review 
of  the  subject  of  weather  modification,  will  be  valuable  and  timely  dur- 
ing the  anticipated  congressional  deliberations. 

DEFINITIONS  AND  SCOPE  OF  REPORT 

In  the  broadest  sense,  weather  modification  refers  to  changes  in 
weather  phenomena  brought  on  purposefully  or  accidentally  through 
human  activity.  Weather  effects  stimulated  unintentionally — such  as 
urban  influences  on  rainfall  or  fogs  produced  by  industrial  com- 
plexes— constitute  what  is  usually  termed  inadvertent  weather  modifi- 
cation. On  the  other  hand,  alterations  to  the  weather  which  are 
induced  consciously  or  intentionally  are  called  planned  or  advertent 
weather  modification.  Such  activities  are  intended  to  influence  single 
weather  events  and  to  occur  over  relatively  short  time  spans,  ranging 
from  a  few  hours  in  the  case  of  clearing  airport  fog  or  seeding  a 
thunderstorm  to  perhaps  a  few  days  when  attempts  are  made  to  re- 
duce the  severity  of  hurricane  winds.  Weather  modification  experi- 
ments or  operations  can  be  initiated  or  stopped  rather  promptly,  and 
changes  resulting  from  such  activities  are  transient  and  generally 
reversible  within  a  matter  of  hours. 

Climate  modification,  by  contrast,  encompasses  changes  of  long-time 
climatic  variables,  usually  affecting  larger  areas  and  with  some  degree 
of  permanence,  at  least  in  the  short  term.  Climatic  changes  are  also 
brought  about  by  human  intervention,  and  they  might  result  from 
either  unintentional  or  planned  activities.  There  are  numerous  ex- 
amples of  possible  inadvertent  climate  modification;  however,  at- 
tempts to  alter  climate  purposefully  are  only  speculative.  The  con- 
cepts of  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification  are  defined 
more  extensively  and  discussed  fully  in  chapter  4  of  this  report. 

The  primary  emphasis  of  this  report  is  on  intentional  or  planned 
modification  of  weather  events  in  the  short  term  for  the  general  bene- 
fit of  people,  usually  in  a  restricted  locality  and  for  a  specific  time. 
Such  benefit  may  accrue  through  increased  agricultural  productiv- 

18  Ross,  Norman  E.,  Jr.,  letter  of  June  5,  1975.  to  Congressman  Gilbert  Gude.  This  letter 
was  the  official  White  House  response  to  a  letter  of  April  25.  1975.  from  Congressmen 
Giule  and  Donald  M.  Fraser  and  Senator  Claiborne  Pell,  addressed  to  the  President,  urging 
that  a  coordinated  Federal  program  be  initiated  in  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modifica- 
tion. The  letter  to  the  President,  the  replv  from  Mr.  Ross,  and  comments  by  Congressman 
Gude  appeared  in  the  Congressional  Record  for  June  17.  1975,  pp.  19201-19203.  (This 
statement  from  the  Congressional  Record  appears  in  app.  A.) 


s 


ity  or  other  advantages  accompanying  augmentation  of  precipitation 
or  they  may  result  from  mitigation  of  effects  of  severe  weather  with 
attendant  decreases  in  losses  of  life  or  property.  There  are  broader 
implications  as  well,  such  as  the  general  improvement  of  weather  for 
the  betterment  of  man's  physical  environment  for  aesthetic  and  cul- 
tural reasons  as  well  as  economic  ones.  The  following  recent  definition 
sums  up  succinctly  all  of  these  purposes : 

Weather  modification  is  the  deliherate  and  mindful  effort  by  men  and  women 
to  enhance  the  atmospheric  environment,  to  aim  the  weather  at  human  purposes.1" 

The  specific  kinds  of  planned  weather  modification  usually  consid- 
ered, and  those  which  are  discussed,  in  turn,  in  some  detail  in  chapter 
3,  are  the  following: 

Precipitation  enhancement. 

Hail  suppression. 

Fog  dissipation. 

Lightning  suppression. 

Mitigation  of  effects  of  severe  storms. 
Planned  weather  modification  is  usually  considered  in  the  context 
of  its  net  benefits  to  society  at  large.  Nevertheless,  it  should  be  recog- 
nized that,  in  particular  instances,  benefits  to  some  segment  of  the 
population  may  be  accompanied  by  unintended  injuries  and  costs, 
which  may  be  real  or  perceived,  to  other  segments.  There  is  yet  an- 
other aspect  of  advertent  weather  modification,  which  has  engendered 
much  controversy,  both  in  the  United  States  and  internationally,  not 
designed  for  the  benefit  of  those  directly  affected — the  use  of  weather 
modification  for  hostile  purposes  such  as  a  weapon  of  war.  This  aspect 
is  not  a  major  consideration  in  this  report,  although  there  is  some 
discussion  in  chapters  5  and  10  of  congressional  concern  about  such  use 
of  the  technology,  and  in  chapter  10  there  is  also  a  review  of  recent 
efforts  by  the  United  Nations  to  develop  a  treaty  barring  hostile  use 
of  weather  modification.20 

Following  this  introductory  chapter,  witli  its  summary  of  issues, 
the  second  chapter  sets  the  historical  perspective  for  weather  modi- 
fication, concentrating  primarily  on  activities  in  the  United  States  to 
about  the  year  1970,  The  third  chapter  attempts  to  review  the  scien- 
tific background,  the  status  of  technology,  and  selected  technical  prob- 
lems areas  in  planned  weather  modification;  while  chapter  4  contains 
a  discussion  of  weather  and  climate  changes  induced  inadvertently  by 
man's  activities  or  by  natural  phenomena. 

The  weather  modification  activities  of  the  Federal  Government — 
those  of  the  Congress  and  the  administrative  and  program  activities 
of  the  executive  branch  agencies — are  encompassed  in  chapter  5 ;  and 
the  findings  and  recommendations  of  major  policy  studies,  conducted 
by  or  on  behalf  of  the  Federal  Government,  are  summarized  in  chap- 
ter 6.  The  seventh,  eighth,  and  ninth  chapters  are  concerned  with 
weather  modification  activities  at  the  level  of  State  and  local  govern- 
ments, by  private  organizations,  and  in  foreign  countries,  respectively. 

111  Wc.it  :'<m-  Modification  Advisory  Hoard,  "A  TVS  Policy  to  Enhance  the  Atmospheric 
Environment,"  Oct.  21,  1!>77.  A  discussion  paper,  included  with  testimony  of  Harlan  Cleve- 
land, Chairman  of  the  Advisory  Hoard,  in  a  congressional  hearing:  U.S.  Congress.  House 
of  Representatives.  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environ- 
ment and  the  Atmosphere.  Weather  Modification.  !).".th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  Oct.  2(5,  1J>77, 
Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  H»77.  p.  25. 

211  Copies  of  the  current  official  position  of  the  I'.S.  Department  of  Defense  on  weather 
modification  and  of  the  draft  TT.\  convention  prohibiting  hostile  use  of  environmental 
modification,  respectively,  are  found  in  apps.  B  and  C. 


9 


The  increasingly  important  international  problems  related  to  weath- 
er modification  are  addressed  in  chapter  10,  while  both  domestic  and 
international  legal  aspects  are  discussed  in  chapter  11.  Chapters  12 
and  13,  respectively,  contain  discussions  on  economic  and  ecological 
aspects  of  this  emerging  technology. 

The  20  appendixes  to  the  report  provide  materials  that  are  both  sup- 
plementary to  textual  discussions  in  the  13  chapters  and  intended 
to  be  valuable  sources  of  reference  data.  In  particular,  attention  is 
called  to  appendix  D,  which  contains  excerpts  dealing  with  weather 
modification  from  the  statutes  of  the  29  States  in  which  such  activities 
are  in  some  way  addressed  by  State  law,  and  to  appendix  E,  which 
provides  the  names  and  affiliations  of  individuals  within  the  50  States 
who  are  cognizant  of  weather  modification  activities  and  interests  with- 
in the  respective  States.  The  reader  is  referred  to  the  table  of  contents 
for  the  subjects  of  the  remaining  appendixes. 

Summary  or  Issues  in  Planned  Weather  Modification 

"The  issues  we  now  face  in  weather  modification  have  roots  in  the 
science  and  technology  of  the  subject,  but  no  less  importantly  in  the 
politics  of  Government  agencies  and  congressional  committees  and  in 
public  attitudes  which  grow  out  of  a  variety  of  historical,  economic, 
and  sociological  factors."  21  In  this  section  there  will  be  an  identifica- 
tion of  critical  issues  which  have  limited  development  of  weather 
modification  and  which  influence  the  ability  to  direct  weather  modifi- 
cation in  a  socially  responsible  manner.  The  categories  of  issues  do 
not  necessarily  correspond  with  the  subjects  of  succeeding  chapters 
dealing  with  various  aspects  of  weather  modification ;  rather,  they  are 
organized  to  focus  on  those  specific  areas  of  the  subject  where  there 
has  been  and  there  are  likely  to  be  problems  and  controversies  which 
impede  the  development  and  application  of  this  technology. 

The  following  sections  examine  technological,  governmental,  legal, 
economic,  social,  international,  and  ecological  issues.  Since  the  primary 
concern  of  this  report  is  with  the  intentional,  planned  use  of  weather 
modification  for  beneficial  purposes,  the  issues  summarized  are  those 
involved  with  the  development  and  use  of  this  advertent  technology. 
Issues  and  recommendations  for  further  research  in  the  area  of  inad- 
vertent weather  modification  are  included  in  chapter  4,  in  which  that 
general  subject  is  fully  discussed. 

TECHNOLOGICAL  PROBLEMS  AND  ISSUES 

In  a  recent  discussion  paper,  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory 
Board  summarized  the  state  of  weather  modification  by  concluding 
that  "no  one  knows  how  to  modify  the  weather  very  well,  or  on  a  very 
large  scale,  or  in  many  atmospheric  conditions  at  all.  The  first  require- 
ment of  a  national  policv  is  to  learn  more  about  the  atmosphere  it- 
self." 22  Representative  of  the  state  of  weather  modification  science 

21Fleagle.  Crutchfield,  Johnson,  and  Abdo,  "Weather  Modification  in  the  Public  Inter- 
est," 1973,  p.  15.  .  .        .  . 

22  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  "A  U.S.  Policy  To  Enhance  the  Atmospheric 
Environment."  Oct.  21,  1977.  This  discussion  paper  was  included  with  the  testimony  ot 
Mr.  Harlan  Cleveland,  Chairman  of  the  Advisory  Board,  in  a  recent  congressional  hearing  : 
U.S.  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  Subcom- 
mittee on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  "Weather  Modification.  9oth  Cong.,  1st 
sess.  Oct.  26,  1977,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Govt.  Print.  Off.,  1977,  p.  25. 


10 


and  technology  is  the  following  commentary  on  the  state  of  under- 
standing in  the  case  of  precipitation  enhancement,  or  rainmaking  as  it 
is  popularly  called : 

Today,  despite  the  fact  that  modern  techniques  aimed  at  artificial  stimulation 
of  rain  rest  upon  sound  physical  principles,  progress  is  still  fairly  slow.  The 
application  of  these  principles  is  complicated  by  the  overwhelming  complexity 
of  atmosheric  phenomena.  It  is  the  same  dilemna  that  meteorologists  face  when 
they  attempt  to  predict  weather.  In  both  cases,  predicting  the  evolution  of 
atmospheric  processes  is  limited  by  insufficient  knowledge  of  the  effects  produced 
by  the  fairly  well-known  interactive  mechanisms  governing  atmospheric  phenom- 
ena. Moreover,  the  temporal  and  spatial  variability  of  atmospheric  phenomena 
presents  an  additional  difficulty.  Since  any  effects  that  are  produced  by  artificial 
intervention  are  always  imposed  upon  already  active  natural  processes,  assess- 
ment of  the  consequences  becomes  even  more  difficult.23 

Grant  recognizes  the  current  progress  and  the  magnitude  of  remain- 
ing problems  when  he  says  that : 

Important^and  steady  advances  have  been  made  in  developing  technology 
for  applied  weather  modification,  but  complexity  of  the  problems  and  lack  of 
adequate  research  resources  and  commitment  retard  progress.  Advances  have 
been  made  in  training  the  needed  specialists,  in  describing  the  natural  and 
treated  cloud  systems,  and  in  developing  methodology  and  tools  for  the  necessary 
research.  Nevertheless,  further  efforts  are  required.24 

Though  it  can  be  argued  that  progress  in  the  development  of  weather 
modification  has  been  retarded  by  lack  of  commitment,  ineffective 
planning,  and  inadequate  funding,  there  are  specific  scientific  and  tech- 
nical problems  and  issues  needing  resolution  which  can  be  identified 
beyond  these  management  problems  and  the  basic  scientific  problem 
quoted  above  with  respect  to  working  with  the  atmosphere.  Particular 
technical  problems  and  issues  at  various  levels  which  continue  to  affect 
both  research  and  operational  activities  are  listed  below : 

1.  There  is  substantial  diversity  of  opinion,  even  among  informed 
scientists,  on  the  present  state  of  technology  for  specific  types  of 
weather  modification  and  their  readiness  for  application  and  with 
regard  to  weather  modification  in  general.-5 

%2.  There  are  many  who  view  weather  modification  only  as  a  drought- 
relief  measure,  expecting  water  deficits  to  be  quickly  replenished 
through  its  emergency  use;  however,  during  such  periods  weather 
modification  is  limited  by  less  frequent  opportunities ;  it  should,  in- 
stead, be  developed  and  promoted  for  its  year-round  use  along  with 
other  water  management  tools.-0 

3.  The  design  and  analysis  of  weather  modification  experiments  is 
intimately  related  to  the  meteorological  prediction  problem,  which 
needs  further  research,  since  the  evaluation  of  any  attempt  to  modify 
the  atmosphere  depends  on  a  comparison  between  some  weather  pa- 
rameter and  an  estimate  of  what  would  have  happened  naturally. 

4.  Many  of  the  problems  which  restrict  Understanding  and  predic- 
tion of  weather  modification  phenomena  stem  from  imprecise  knowl- 
edge of  fundamental  cloud  processes;  the  level  of  research  in  funda- 

2:1  Dennis,  Arnett  S.,  and  A.  Ge^in.  "Recommendations  for  Future  Research  in  Weatlier 
Modification,"  U.S.  Department  <»i"  Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admin- 
istration, Environmental  Research  Laboratories.  Boulder,  Colo..  November  1077.  p.  VI. 

-"Grant.  "Scientific  and  Other  Uncertainties  of  Weather  .Modification,"  1977.  p.  17. 

88  Sec  table  2,  ch.      D.  ">!>. 

-•  Silverman.  Bernard  A.,  "What  Do  We  Need  In  Weather  Modification?"  In  preprints 
of  the  Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  .Modification,  Oct.  lO-l.'i, 
1077,  Champaign,  111.,  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977,  p.  308. 


II 


mental  cloud  physics  and  cloud  modeling  has  not  kept  pace  with 
weather  modification  activity.27 

5.  Progress  in  the  area  of  weather  modification  evaluation  meth- 
odology has  been  slow,  owing  to  the  complexity  of  verification  prob- 
lems and  to  inadequate  understanding  of  cloud  physics  and  dynamics. 

6.  Most  operational  weather  modification  projects,  usually  for  the 
sake  of  economy  or  in  the  anticipation  of  achieving  results  faster  and 
in  greater  abundance,  fail  to  include  a  satisfactory  means  for  project 
evaluation. 

7.  There  are  difficulties  inherent  in  the  design  and  evaluation  of  any 
experiment  or  operation  which  is  established  to  test  the  efficacy  of 
any  weather  modification  technique,  and  such  design  requires  the 
inclusion  of  proper  statistical  methods. 

8.  In  view  of  the  highly  varying  background  of  natural  weather 
phenomena,  statistical  evaluation  of  seeding  requires  a  sufficiently 
long  experimental  period:  many  research  projects  just  barely  fail 
to  achieve  significance  and  credibility  because  of  early  termination; 
thus,  there  is  a  need  for  longer  commitment  for  such  projects,  perhaps 
5  to  10  years,  to  insure  that  meaningful  results  can  be  obtained.2S 

9.  There  is  a  need  to  develop  an  ability  to  predict  possible  adverse 
weather  effects  which  might  accompany  modification  of  specific 
weather  phenomena  :  for  example,  the  extent  to  which  hail  suppression 
or  diminishing  hurricane  winds  might  also  reduce  beneficial  precipi- 
tation, or  the  possibility  of  increasing  hailfall  or  incidence  of  light- 
ning from  efforts  to  stimulate  rainfall  from  cumulus  clouds.29 

10.  The  translation  of  cloud-seeding  technologies  demonstrated  in 
one  area  to  another  geographical  area  has  been  less  than  satisfactory; 
this  has  been  especially  so  in  the  case  of  convective  cloud  systems, 
whose  differences  are  complex  and  subtle  and  whose  classification  is 
complicated  and  sometimes  inconsistent. 

11.  There  is  increasing  evidence  that  attempts  to  modify  clouds 
in  a  prescribed  target  area  have  also  induced  changes  outside  the 
target  area,  resulting  in  the  so-called  downwind  or  extended  area 
effect :  reasons  for  this  phenomenon  and  means  for  reducing  negative 
results  need  investigation. 

1*2.  There  is  the  possibility  that  cloud  seeding  in  a  given  area  and 
during  a  given  time  period  has  led  to  residual  or  extended  time  effects 
on  weather  phenomena  in  the  target  area  beyond  those  planned  from 
the  initial  seeding. 

13.  The  conduct  of  independent  cloud-seeding  operations  in  adjacent 
locations  or  in  the  neighborhood  of  weather  modification  experiments 
may  cause  contamination  of  the  atmosphere  so  that  experimental 
results  or  estimates  of  operational  success  are  biased. 

14.  There  have  been  and  continue  to  be  conflicting  claims  as  to 
the  reliability  with  which  one  can  conduct  cloud-seeding  operations 
so  that  the  seeding  agent  is  transported  properly  from  the  dispensing 
device  to  the  clouds  or  portions  of  the  clouds  one  seeks  to  modify. 

27  Hosier.  C.  L..  "Overt  Weather  Modification.*'  Reviews  of  Geophysics  and  Space  Phys- 
ics, vol.  12.  Xo.  3,  August  1974,  p.  526. 

28  Simpson.  Joanne,  "What  Weather  Modification  Needs."  In  preprints  of  the  Sixth 
Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification.  Oct.  10-13,  1977.  Cham- 
paign. 111..  Boston.  American  Meteorological  Society.  1977,  p.  306. 

29  Hosier,  "Overt  Weather  Modification,'-  1974,  p.  325. 


12 


15.  There  is  need  to  develop,  improve,  and  evaluate  new  and  cur- 
rently used  cloud-seeding  materials  and  to  improve  systems  for  deliv- 
ery of  these  materials  into  the  clouds. 

16.  There  is  need  to  improve  the  capability  to  measure  concentra- 
tions of  background  freezing  nuclei  and  their  increase  through  seed- 
ing; there  is  poor  agreement  between  measurements  made  with  various 
ice  nucleus  counters,  and  there  is  uncertainty  that  cloud  chamber 
measurements  are  applicable  to  real  clouds.30 

IT.  In  order  to  estimate  amounts  of  fallen  precipitation  in  weather 
modification  events,  a  combination  of  weather  radar  and  raingage 
network  are  often  used;  results  from  such  measurement  systems  have 
often  been  unsatisfactory  owing  to  the  quality  of  the  radar  and  its 
calibration,  and  to  uncertainties  of  the  radar-raingage  intercalibration. 

18.  There  is  continuing  need  for  research  in  establishing  seedability 
criteria ;  that  is,  definition  of  physical  cloud  conditions  when  seeding 
will  be  effective  in  increasing  precipitation  or  in  bringing  about  some 
other  desired  weather  change. 

10.  Mathematical  models  used  to  describe  cloud  processes  or  account 
for  interaction  of  cloud  systems  and  larger  scale  weather  systems 
greatly  oversimplify  the  real  atmosphere;  therefore,  model  research 
must  be  coupled  with  field  research.31 

GOVERNMENTAL  ISSUES 

The  basic  problem  which  encompasses  all  governmental  weather 
modification  issues  revolves  about  the  question  of  the  respective  roles, 
if  any,  of  the  Federal,  State,  and  local  governments.  Resolution  of  this 
fundamental  question  puts  into  perspective  the  specific  issues  of  where 
m  the  several  governmental  levels,  and  to  what  extent,  should  goals  be 
set,  policy  established,  research  and/or  operations  supported,  activities 
regulated,  and  disputes  settled.  Part  of  this  basic  question  includes 
the  role  of  the  international  community,  considered  in  another  section 
on.  international  issues;32  the  transnational  character  of  weather  modi- 
fication may  one  day  dictate  the  principal  role  to  international  orga- 
nizations. 

Role  of  the  Federal  Government 

Because  weather  modification  cannot  be  restricted  by  State  bound- 
aries and  because  the  Federal  Government  has  responsibilities  for  re- 
source development  and  for  reduction  of  losses  from  natural  hazards, 
few  would  argue  that  the  Federal  Government  ought  not  to  have  some 
interest  and  some  purpose  in  development  and  possible  use  of  weather 
modification  technolo<rv.  The  following  broad  and  specific  issues  on 
the  role  of  the  Federal  Government  in  weather  modification  are  among 
those  which  may  be  considered  in  developing  a  Federal  policy: 

1.  Should  a  maior  policy  analysis  be  conducted  in  an  attempt  to  re- 
late weather  modification  to  the  Xatioivs  broad  goals;  that  is,  improv- 
ing human  health  and  the  qualit  v  of  life,  maintaining  national  security, 
providing  sufficient  energy  supplies,  enhancing  environmental  quality, 
and  the  production  of  food  and  fiber?  Barbara  Farhar  suggests  that 
such  a  study  has  not  been,  but  ought  to  be.  undertaken.33 

™  Fbld. 

m  Fleagle  et  al.,  "Weather  Modification  in  tUo  Public  interest."  197^.  n  St. 

n=  Sop  n.  2& 

"Farhar,  Barbara  C.  "The  Societal  Imidieations  of  Weather  Modification:  a  TCeview 
of  issues  Toward  m  National  Policy.*'  Background  paper  prepared  f«r  the  U.S.  Department 
of  Commerce  Weather  ModinVatlonAdvisory  Hoard,  Mar.  1,  1977,  p.  2. 


13 


2.  Should  the  Federal  Government  commit  itself  to  planned  weather 
modification  as  one  of  several  priority  national  goals  ?  It  can  be  argued 
that  such  commitment  is  important  since  Federal  program  support  and 
political  attitudes  have  an  important  overall  influence  on  the  develop  - 
ment and  the  eventual  acceptance  and  application  of  this  technology. 

3.  Is  there  a  need  to  reexamine,  define,  and  facilitate  a  well-balanced, 
coordinated,  and  adequately  funded  Federal  research  and  development 
program  in  weather  modification  ?  Many  argue  that  the  current  Fed- 
eral research  program  is  fragmented  and  that  the  level  of  funding  is 
subcritical. 

4.  Is  there  a  suitable  Federal  role  in  weather  modification  activities 
beyond  that  of  research  and  development — such  as  project  evaluation 
and  demonstration  and  operational  programs?  If  such  programs  are 
advisable,  how  can  they  be  identified,  justified,  and  established  ? 

5.  Should  the  practice  of  providing  Federal  grants  or  operational 
services  by  Federal  agencies  to  States  for  weather  modification  in  times 
of  emergency  be  reexamined,  and  should  procedures  for  providing  such 
grants  and  services  be  formalized  ?  It  has  been  suggested  that  such  as- 
sistance in  the  past  has  been  haphazard  and  has  been  provided  after  it 
was  too  late  to  be  of  any  practical  benefit. 

6.  Should  the  organizational  structure  of  the  Federal  Government 
for  weather  modification  be  reexamined  and  reorganized  ?  If  so,  what 
is  the  optimum  agency  structure  for  conducting  the  Federal  research 
program  and  other  functions  deemed  to  be  appropriate  for  the  Federal 
Government? 

7.  TThat  is  the  role  of  the  Federal  Government,  if  any,  in  regulation 
of  weather  modification  activities,  including  licensing,  permitting, 
notification,  inspection,  and  reporting?  If  such  a  role  is  to  be  modified 
or  expanded,  how  should  existing  Federal  laws  and/or  regulations  be 
modified  ? 

8.  If  all  or  any  of  the  regulatory  functions  are  deemed  to  be  more  ap- 
propriate for  the  States  than  for  the  Federal  Government,  should  the 
Federal  Government  consider  mandating  minimum  standards  and 
some  uniformity  among  State  laws  and  regulations? 

9.  Should  the  Federal  Government  attempt  to  develop  a  means  ade- 
quate for  governing  the  issues  of  atmospheric  water  rights  between 
States,  on  Federal  lands,  and  between  the  United  States  and  neighbor- 
ing countries  ? 

10.  Where  federally  sponsored  research  or  possible  operational 
weather  modification  projects  occupy  the  same  locale  as  local  or 
State  projects,  with  the  possibility  of  interproject  contamination, 
should  a  policy  on  project  priorities  be  examined  and  established? 

11.  Should  the  Federal  Government  develop  a  policy  with  regard 
to  the  military  use  of  weather  modification  and  the  active  pursuit  of 
international  agreements  for  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modifica- 
tion? This  has  been  identified  as  perhaps  one  of  the  most  important 
areas  of  Federal  concern.34 

12.  Is  there  a  need  to  examine  and  define  the  Federal  responsibility 
for  disseminating  information  about  the  current  state  of  weather 
modication  technology  and  about  Federal  policy,  including  the  capa- 
bility for  providing  technical  assistance  to  the  States  and  to  others? 

fS*Farhar  Barbara  C.  "What  r>o°s  Weatber  Modification  Need"-  In  preprints  of  the 
Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,  Oct.  10-13,  1977, 
Champaign.  111.,  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977,  p.  299. 


14 


13.  Should  there  be  a  continuing  review  of  weather  modification 
technology  capabilities  so  that  Federal  policy  can  be  informed  regard- 
ing the  readiness  of  technologies  for  export  to  foreign  nations,  with 
provision  of  technical  assistance  where  and  when  it  seems  feasible? 35 

14.  How  does  the  principle  of  cooperative  federalism  apply  to 
weather  modification  research  projects  and  possible  operations  carried 
out  within  the  States  ?  Should  planning  of  projects  with  field  activities 
in  particular  States  be  done  in  consultation  with  the  States,  and  should 
cooperation  with  the  States  through  joint  funding  and  research  efforts 
be  encouraged  ? 

15.  What  should  be  the  role  of  the  single  Federal  agency  whose 
activities  are  most  likely  to  be  affected  significantly  by  weather  modi- 
fication technology  and  whose  organization  is  best  able  to  provide 
advisory  services  to  the  States— the  U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture? 
Among  the  several  agencies  involved  in  weather  modification,  the 
Department  of  Agriculture  has  demonstrated  least  official  interest 
and  lias  not  provided  appreciable  support  to  development  of  the 
technology.36 

Roles  of  State  and  local  go  vernments 

State  and  local 37  governments  are  in  man}'  ways  closer  to  the 
public  than  the  Federal  Government — often  as  a  result  of  more  direct 
contact  and  personal  acquaintance  with  officials  and  through  greater 
actual  or  perceived  control  by  the  voters.  Consequently,  a  number  of 
weather  modification  functions,  for  both  reasons  of  practical  effi- 
ciency and  social  acceptance,  may  be  better  reserved  for  State  and/or 
local  implementation.  Since  weather  phenomena  and  weather  modifica- 
tion operations  cannot  be  restricted  by  State  boundaries  or  by  bound- 
aries within  States,  however,  many  functions  cannot  be  carried  out 
in  isolation.  Moreover,  because  of  the  economy  in  conducting  research 
nnd  development  on  a  common  basis — and  perhaps  performing  other 
functions  as  well — through  a  single  governmental  entity,  such  as  an 
agency  or  agencies  of  the  Federal  Government,  it  may  be  neither 
feasible  nor  wise  for  State  governments  (even  less  for  local  jurisdic- 
tions) to  carry  out  all  activities. 

Thus,  there  are  activities  which  might  best  be  reserved  for  the  States 
(and  possibly  for  local  jurisdictions  within  States),  and  those  which 
more  properly  belong  to  the  Federal  Government.  In  the  previous 
l  ist  of  issues  on  the  role  of  the  Federal  Government,  there  was  allusion 
to  a  number  of  functions  which  might,  wholly  or  in  part,  be  the  re- 
sponsibility of  either  Federal  or  State  governments;  most  of  these 
will  not  be  repeated  here.  Issues  and  problems  concerned  primarily 
with  State  and  local  government  functions  are  listed  below: 

1.  State  weather  modification  laws.  Where  they  exist,  are  nonuni- 
form in  their  requirements  and  specifications  for  licensing,  permitting, 
inspection,  reporting,  liabilities,  and  penalties  for  violations.  More- 
over, some  State  laws  and  policies  favor  weather  modification,  while 
ot  hers  oppose  1  he  technology. 

2.  Authorities  for  funding  operational  and  research  projects  with- 
in States  and  local  jurisdictions  within  States,  through  public  funds 

[bid. 

:"  Changnon,  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification."  |p.  11. 

37  ,fLocal"  bere  refers  broadly  to  any  jurisdiction  below  the  State  level  :  it  could  laelucto 
cities,  townships,  counties,  groups  of  counties,  water  districts,  or  any  other  organized  area 
Operating  under  public  authority. 


15 


or  through  special  tax  assessments,  vary  widely  and,  except  in  a  few 
States,  do  not  exist. 

3.  Decisionmaking  procedures  for  public  officials  appear  to  be  often 
lacking;  these  could  be  established  and  clarified,  especially  as  the  pos- 
sibility of  more  widespread  application  of  weather  modification  tech- 
nology approaches. 

4.  Many  public  officials,  usually  not  trained  in  scientific  and  en- 
gineering skills,  often  do  not  understand  weather  modification  tech- 
nology, its  benefits,  and  its  potential  negative  consequences.  Some 
training  of  such  officials  could  contribute  to  their  making  wise  de- 
cisions on  the  use  of  the  technology,  even  without  complete  informa- 
tion on  which  to  base  such  decisions. 

5.  Many  weather  modification  decisions  have  had  strong  political 
overtones,  with  some  legislators  and  other  public  officials  expressing 
their  views  or  casting  their  votes  allegedly  on  the  basis  of  political 
expediency  rather  than  on  the  basis  of  present  or  potential  societal 
benefits. 

6.  State  and  local  authorities  may  need  to  provide  for  the  education 
of  the  general  public  on  the  rudiments  of  weather  modification,  on  its 
economic  benefits  and  disbenefits.  and  on  other  societal  aspects. 

7.  To  keep  communication  channels  open,  mechanisms  such  as  pub- 
lic hearings  could  be  established  to  receive  comments,  criticisms,  and 
general  public  sentiments  on  weather  modification  projects  from  in- 
dividual citizens  and  from  various  interest  groups. 

8.  Criteria  and  mechanisms  have  not  been  established  for  compen- 
sating those  individuals  or  groups  within  States  who  might  be  eco- 
nomically injured  from  weather  modification  operations. 

9.  Questions  of  water  rights  within  States,  as  well  as  between  States, 
have  not  been  addressed  and/or  resolved  in  a  uniform  manner. 

LEGAL  ISSUES 

Legal  issues  in  weather  modification  are  complex  and  unsettled. 
They  can  be  discussed  in  at  least  four  broad  categories : 

1.  Private  rights  in  the  clouds ; 

2.  Liability  for  weather  modification  ; 

3.  Interstate  legal  issues ;  and 

4.  International  legal  issues,38 

The  body  of  law  on  weather  modification  is  slight,  and  existing  case 
law  offers  few  guidelines  to  determine  these  issues.  It  is  often  neces- 
sary, therefore,  to  analogize  weather  modification  issues  to  more  set- 
tled areas  of  law  such  as  those  pertaining  to  water  distribution. 

Private  rights  in  the  clouds 

The  following  issues  regarding  private  rights  in  the  clouds  may  be 
asked : 

Are  there  any  private  rights  in  the  clouds  or  in  the  water  which 
may  be  acquired  from  them  ? 

Does  a  landowner  have  any  particular  rights  in  atmospheric 
water  ? 

Does  a  weather  modifier  have  rights  in  atmospheric  water  \ 

^Questions  on  regulation  or  control  of  weather  modification  activities  through  licensing 
and  permitting,  while  of  a  basic  legal  nature,  are  related  to  important  administrative  func- 
tions and  are  dealt  with  under  issues  concerned  with  Federal  and  State  activities. 


1(3 


Some  State  statutes  reserve  the  ownership  or  right  to  use  atmospheric 
water  to  the  State.39 

There  is  no  general  statutory  determination  of  ownership  of  atmos- 
pheric water  and  there  is  no  well-developed  body  of  case  law.  Conse- 
quently, analogies  to  the  following  general  common  law  doctrines  may 
be  helpful,  but  each  has  its  own  disadvantages  when  applied  to  weather 
modification : 

1.  The  doctrine  of  natural  rights,  basically  a  protection  of  the  land- 
owner's right  to  use  his  land  in  its  natural  condition  (i.e.,  precipita- 
tion is  essential  to  use  of  the  land  as  are  air,  sunlight,  and  the  soil 
itself). 

2.  The  ad  coelum  doctrine  which  states  that  whoever  owns  the  land 
ought  also  to  own  all  the  space  above  it  to  an  indefinite  extent. 

3.  The  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  by  which  the  one  owning  land 
which  abuts  a  watercourse  may  make  reasonable  use  of  the  writer,  sub- 
ject to  similar  rights  of  others  whose  lands  abut  the  watercourse. 

4.  The  doctrine  of  appropriation,  which  gives  priority  of  right  based 
on  actual  use  of  the  water. 

5.  The  two  main  doctrines  of  ownership  in  the  case  of  oil  and  gas 
(considered,  like  water,  to  be  "fugitive  and  migratory"  substances)  ; 
that  is,  (a)  the  non-ownership  theory,  by  which  no  one  owns  the  oil  and 
gas  until  it  is  produced  and  anyone  may  capture  them  if  able  to  do  so; 
and  (b)  the  ownership-in-place  theory,  by  which  the  landowner  has  the 
same  interest  in  oil  and  gas  as  in  solid  minerals  contained  in  his  land. 

6.  The  concept  of  "developed  water,"  that  is,  water  that  would  not 
be  available  or  would  be  lost  were  it  not  for  man's  improvements. 

7.  The  concept  of  "imported  water,"  that  is,  water  brought  from  one 
watershed  to  another. 

Liability  for  weather  modification 

Issues  of  liability  for  damage  may  arise  when  drought,  flooding,  or 
other  severe  weather  phenomena  occur  following  attempts  to  modify 
the  weather.  Such  issues  include  causation  as  well  as  nuisance,  strict 
liability,  trespass,  and  negligence.  Other  issues  which  could  arise  relate 
to  pollution  of  the  air  or  water  through  introduction  of  artificial  nu- 
cleants  such  as  silver  iodide,  into  the  environment.  While  statutes  of 
10  States  discuss  weather  modification  liability,  there  is  much  varia- 
tion among  the  specific  provisions  of  the  laws  in  those  States.40 

Before  any  case  can  be  made  for  weather  modification  liability 
based  upon  causation  it  must  be  proven  that  the  adverse  weather  con- 
ditions  were  indeed  brought  about  by  the  weather  modifier,  a  very 
heavy  burden  of  proof  for  the  plaintiff.  In  fact,  the  scientific  uncer- 
tainties of  weather  modi  Heal  ion  are  such  that  no  one  has  ever  been  able 
to  establish  causation  of  damage  through  these  activities.  As  weal  her 
modification  technology  is  improved,  however,  the  specter  of  a  host  of 
liability  issues  is  expected  to  emerge  as  evidence  for  causation  becomes 
more  plausible. 

While  the  general  defense  of  the  weather  modifier  against  liability 
charges  is  that  causation  has  not  been  established,  he  may  also  use  as 
further  defense  the  arguments  based  upon  immunity,  privilege,  con- 
sent ,  and  waste. 


•  Sec  p.  4.">o,  ch.  1 1.  and  app.  n. 

M  Sec  discussion  p.  453  in  ch.  11  and  app.  D. 


17 


Interstate  legal  issues 

When  weather  modification  activities  conducted  in  one  State  affect 
another  State  as  well,  significant  issues  may  arise.  The  following- 
problem  categories  are  examples  of  some  generally  unresolved  inter- 
state issues  in  weather  modification : 

1.  There  may  be  the  claim  that  cloud  seeding  in  one  State  has  removed 
from  the  clouds  water  which  should  have  fallen  in  a  second  State  or 
that  excessive  flooding  in  a  neighboring  State  has  resulted  from  seed- 
ing in  a  State  upwind. 

2.  Operation  of  cloud-seeding  equipment  near  the  border  in  one  State 
may  violate  local  or  State  ordinances  which  restrict  or  prohibit  weather 
modification  in  an  adjacent  State,  or  such  operations  may  conflict  with 
regulations  for  licensing  or  permitting  of  activities  within  the  bor- 
dering State. 

Some  States  have  attempted  to  resolve  these  issues  through  specific 
legislation  and  through  informal  bilateral  agreements.41  Another  ap- 
proach would  be  through  interstate  compact,  though  such  compacts  re- 
quire the  consent  of  Congress.  No  compacts  specifically  concerned  with 
weather  modification  currently  exist,  though  some  existing  compacts 
allocating  waters  in  interstate  streams  may  be  applicable  to  weather 
modification. 

International  legal  issues 

Because  atmospheric  processes  operate  independent  of  national 
borders,  weather  modification  is  inherently  of  international  concern. 
International  legal  issues  have  similarities  to  domestic  interstate  activi- 
ties and  dangers.  The  following  serious  international  questions,  which 
have  arisen  in  conjunction  with  a  developing  capability  to  modify  the 
weather,  have  been  identified  by  Orfield : 42 

Do  countries  have  the  right  to  take  unilateral  action  in  all 
weather  modification  activities? 

What  liability  might  a  country  incur  for  its  weather  modifica- 
tion operations  which  [might]  destroy  life  and  property  in  a 
foreign  State? 

On  what  theory  could  and  should  that  State  base  its  claim  ? 
The  primary  international  legal  issue  regarding  weather  modifica- 
tion is  that  of  liability  for  transnational  injury  or  damage,  which  could 
conceivably  result  from  any  of  the  following  situations : 

(1)  injury  or  damage  in  another  nation  caused  by  weather 
modification  activities  executed  within  the  United  States; 

(2)  injury  or  damage  in  another  nation  caused  by  weather 
modification  activities  executed  in  that  nation  or  a  third  nation  by 
the  United  States  or  a  citizen  of  the  United  States ; 

(3)  injury  or  damage  in  another  nation  caused  by  weather 
modification  activities  executed  in  an  area  not  subject  to  the  juris- 
diction of  any  nation  (e.g.,  over  the  high  seas),  by  the  United 
States  or  a  citizen  thereof ;  and 

(4)  injury  or  damage  to  an  alien  or  an  alien's  property  within 
the  United  States  caused  by  weather  modification  activities  exe- 
cuted within  the  United  States. 

41  See  discussion  p.  457  in  ch.  11  and  app.  D. 

42  Orfield,  Michael  B..  "Weather  Genesis  and  Weather  Neutralization:  a  New  Approach 
to  Weather  Modification,"  California  Western  International  Law  Journal,  vol.  6,  no.  2, 
spring  1976,  p.  414. 


34-S57— 79  4 


18 


Whereas  domestic  weather  modification  law  is  confused  and  unset- 
tled, international  law  in  this  area  is  barely  in  the  formative  stage.  In 
time,  ramifications  of  weather  modification  may  lead  to  major  interna- 
tionl  controversy.43 

ECONOMIC  ISSUES 

The  potential  for  long-term  economic  gains  through  weather  modi- 
fication cannot  be  denied  ;  however,  current,  economic  analyses  are  tenu- 
ous in  view  of  present  uncertainty  of  the  technology  and  the  complex 
nature  of  attendant  legal  and  economic  problems.  Meaningful  economic 
evaluation  of  weather  modification  activities  is  thus  limited  to  special, 
localized  cases,  such  as  the  dispersal  of  cold  fog  at  airports,  where  bene- 
fit-cost ratios  greater  than  5  to  1  have  been  realized  through  savings  in 
delayed  or  diverted  traffic.  Various  estimated  costs  for  increased  pre- 
cipitation through  cloud  seeding  range  from  $1.50  to  $2.50  per  acre- 
foot  in  the  western  United  States. 

fsy/es  complicating  economic  analyses  of  weather  modification 

Costs  of  most  weather  modification  operations  are  usually  relatively 
small  and  are  normally  believed  to  be  only  a  fraction  of  the  benefits 
obtained  through  such  operations.  However,  if  all  the  benefits  and  all 
the  costs  are  considered,  benefit-cost  ratios  may  be  diminished.  While 
direct  costs  and  benefits  from  weather  modification  are  reasonably 
obvious,  indirect  costs  and  benefits  are  elusive  and  require  further  study 
of  sociological,  legal,  and  ecological  implications. 

In  analyzing  benefit-cost  ratios,  some  of  the  following  considerations 
need  to  be  examined  : 

Weather  modification  benefits  must  be  considered  in  terms  of 
the  costs  for  achieving  the  same  objectives  as  increased  precipita- 
tion, e.g.,  through  importation  of  water,  modified  use  of  agricul- 
tural chemicals,  or  introduction  of  improved  plant  strains. 

Costs  for  weather  modification  operations  are  so  low  in  compari- 
son with  other  agricultural  investments  that  farmers  may  gamble 
in  spending  the  5  to  20  cents  per  acre  for  operations  designed  to 
increase  rainfall  or  suppress  hail  in  order  to  increase  yield  per 
acre,  even  though  the  results  of  the  weather  modification  opera- 
tions may  be  doubtful. 

Atmospheric  conditions  associated  with  prolonged  droughts  are 
not  conducive  to  success  in  increasing  precipitation;  however, 
under  these  conditions,  it  is  likely  that  increased  expenditures 
may  be  made  for  operations  which  offer  little  hope  of  economic 
return. 

Increased  precipitation,  obtained  through  a  weather  modifica- 
tion program  sponsored  and  funded  by  a  group  of  farmers',  can 
also  benefit  other  farmers  who  have  not  shared  in  the  costs;  thus, 
the  benefit-cost  ratio  to  those  participating  in  the  program  is 
higher  than  it  need  be  if  all  share  in  its  costs. 

As  weather  modification  technology  develops  and  programs  be- 
come more1  sophisticated',  increased  costs  for  equipment  and  labor 
will  increase  direct  costs  to  clients:  indirect  costs  resulting  from 
increased  State  license  and  permit  fees  and  liability  insurance  for 
operators  will  probably  also  be  passed  on  to  the  customer. 


I:  s»'c  ch.  10  on  International  aspects  and  i>.  4<;s.  ch.  11;  on  International  legal  aspects  of 
wpa  i  her  modification. 


19 


The  sophistication  of  future  programs  will  likely  incur  addi- 
tional costs  for  design,  evaluation,  and  program  information  ac- 
tivities, along  with  supporting  meteorological  prediction  services; 
these  costs  will  be  paid  from  public  funds  or  by  private  clients,  in 
either  case  reducing  the  overall  benefit-cost  ratios. 

Ultimate  costs  for  compensation  to  those  incurring  disbenefits 
from  weather  modification  operations  will  offset  overall  benefits 
and  thus  reduce  bene  fit -cost  ratios. 

Weather  modification  and  conflicting  interests 

There  are  numerous  cases  of  both  real  and  perceived  economic  losses 
which  one  or  more  sectors  of  the  public  may  suff  er  while  another  group 
is  seeking  economic  advantage  through  some  form  of  weather  modi- 
fication. Overall  benefits  from  weather  modification  are  accordingly 
reduced  when  net  gains  are  computed  from  such  instances  of  mixed 
economic  advantages  and  disadvantages.  Benefits  to  the  parties  seek- 
ing economic  gain  through  weather  modification  will  be  directly  re- 
duced at  such  time  when  mechanisms  are  established  for  compensating 
those  who  have  suffered  losses.  The  following  are  some  examples  of 
such  conflicting  situations : 

Successful  suppression  of  hail  may  be  valuable  in  reducing  crop 
damage  for  orchardists  while  other  agricultural  crops  may  suffer 
f  rom  decrease  of  rain  concomitant  with  the  hail  decrease. 

Additional  rainy  days  may  be  of  considerable  value  to  farmers 
during  their  growing  season  but  may  be  detrimental  to  the  finan- 
cial success  of  outdoor  recreational  enterprises. 

Increased  snowpack  from  orographic  cloud  seeding  may  be 
beneficial  to  agricultural  and  hydroelectric  power  interests  but 
increases  the  costs  for  maintaining  free  passage  over  highways 
and  railroads  in  mountainous  areas. 

Successful  abatement  of  winds  from  severe  storms,  such  as  those 
of  hurricanes,  may  result  in  decreased  precipitation  necessary  for 
agriculture  in  nearby  coastal  regions  or  may  redistribute  the  ad- 
verse storm  effects,  so  that  one  coastal  area  is  benefitted  at  the  ex- 
pense of  others. 

SOCIAL  ISSUES 

It  has  been  said  that  "weather  modification  is  a  means  toward  so- 
cially desired  ends,  not  an  end  in  itself.  It  is  one  potential  tool  in  a  set 
of  possible  societal  adjustments  to  the  vagaries  of  the  weather.  Iden- 
tifying when,  where,  and  how  to  use  this  tool,  once  it  is  scientifically 
established,  is  the  primary  need  in  weather  modification." 44  It  is  likely 
that,  in  the  final  analysis,  the  ultimate  decisions  on  whether  weather 
modification  should  and  will  be  used  in  any  given  instance  or  will  be 
adopted  more  generally  as  national  or  State  programs  depends  on 
social  acceptance  of  this  tool,  no  matter  how  well  the  tool  itself  has 
been  perfected.  That  this  is  increasingly  the  case  has  been  Suggested  by 
numerous  examples  in  recent  years.  Recently  Silverman  said : 

Weather  modification,  whether  it  he  research  or  operations,  will  not  progress 
wisely,  or  perhaps  at  all,  unless  it  is  considered  in  a  context  that  includes  everyone 

M  Fnrhar.  Barbara  C.  "What  Does  Weather  Modification  Need  ?"  In  preprints  of  the  Sixth 
Conference  on  rianr.pd  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification.  October  10-13,  1977.  Cham- 
paign* 111.  Boston.  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977.  p.  296. 


20 


that  may  be  affected.  We  must  develop  and  provide  a  new  image  of  weather 
modification.45 

Regardless  of  net  economic  benefits,  a  program  is  hard  to  justify 
when  it  produces  obvious  social  losses  as  well  as  gains. 

Research  in  the  social  science  of  weather  modification  has  not  kept 
pace  with  the  development  of  the  technology,  slow  as  that  has  been. 
In  time,  this  failure  may  be  a  serious  constraint  on  further  develop- 
ment and  on  its  ultimate  application.  In  the  past,  organized  opposition 
has  been  very  effective  in  retarding  research  experiments  and  in  cur- 
tailing operational  cloud-seeding  programs.  Thus,  there  is  need  for  an 
expanded  effort  in  understanding  public  behavior  toward  weather 
modification  and  for  developing  educational  programs  and  effective 
decisionmaking  processes  to  insure  intelligent  public  involvement  in 
eventual  application  of  the  technology. 

Social  issues  discussed  in  this  section  are  those  which  relate  to  public 
behavior  and  public  response  to  weather  modification,  while  societal 
issues  are  generally  considered  to  include  economic,  legal,  and  other 
nontechnical  issues  as  Veil  as  the  social  ones.  These  other  aspects  of 
societal  issues  were  discussed  in  preceding  sections.  In  the  subsections 
to  follow  there  are  summaries  of  social  implications  of  weather  modifi- 
cation, the  need  for  public  education,  and  the  problem  of 
decisionmaking. 

Social  factors 

It  has  been  said  that  social  factors  are  perhaps  the  most  elusive  and 
difficult  weather  modification  externalities  to  evaluate  since  such  fac- 
tors impinge  on  the  vast  and  complex  area  of  human  values  and  at- 
titudes.46 Fleagle,  et  al.,  identified  the  following  important  social 
implications  of  weather  modification,  which  would  presumably  be 
taken  into  account  in  formulation  of  policies : 47 

1.  The  individuals  and  groups  to  be  affected,  positively  or  negatively,  by  tlie 
project  must  be  defined.  An  operation  beneficial  to  one  party  may  actually  barm 
another.  Or  an  aggrieved  party  may  hold  the  operation  responsible  *  *  :::  for 
damage  *  *  *  which  might  occur  at  the  same  time  or  following  the  modification. 

2.  The  impact  of  a  contemplated  weather  modification  effort  on  the  genera! 
well-being  of  society  and  the  environment  as  a  whole  must  be  evaluated.  Con- 
sideration should  be  given  to  conservationists,  outdoor  societies,  and  other 
citizens  and  groups  representing  various  interests  who  presently  tend  to  ques- 
tion any  policies  aimed  at  changes  in  the  physical  environment.  It  is  reasonable 
and  prudent  to  assume  that,  as  weather  modification  operations  expand,  question- 
ing and  opposition  by  the  public  will  become  more  vocal. 

3.  Consideration  must  be  given  to  the  general  mode  of  human  behavior  in 
response  to  innovation.  There  are  cases  where  local  residents,  perceiving  a  cause 
and  effect  relationship  between  economic  losses  from  severe  weather  and  nearby 
weather  modification  operations,  have  continued  to  protest,  and  even  to  threaten 
violence,  after  all  operations  bave  been  suspended. 

4.  The  uniqueness  and  complexity  of  certain  weather  modification  operations 
must  be  acknowledged,  and  special  attention  should  be  given  to  their  social  and 
legal  implications.  The  cases  of  hurricanes  and  tornadoes  are  especially  perti- 
nent. Alteration  of  a  few  degrees  in  the  path  of  a  hurricane  may  result  in  its 
missing  a  certain  area  *  *  *  and  ravaging  *  *  *  instead,  a  different  one.  The  decision 
on  whether  such  an  operation  is  justified  can  reasonably  be  made  only  at  the 
highest  level,  and  would  need  to  be  based  on  the  substantial  scientific  finding 
thai  the  anticipated  damages  would  be  loss  than  those  originally  predicted  h  td 
the  hurricane  been  allowed  to  follow  its  course. 

1  b  Silverman,  Bernard  A.  "What  Do  We  Need  in  Weather  Modification?"  In  preprints  of 
tli<'  Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  [nadvertenl  Weather  Modification,  October  10—13, 
litTT.  Champaign,  ill..  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society.  u»77.  p.  310. 

ia  Flengle,  Crutchfleld,  Johnson,  and  Abdo.  "Weather  Modification  in  the  Public  Interest." 
1074.  p.  :',7-38. 

*•  Ibid.,  p.  38-40. 


21 


5.  Attention  must  be  given  to  alternatives  in  considering  a  given  weather 
modification  proposal.  The  public  may  prefer  some  other  solution  to  an  attempt 
at  weather  tampering  which  may  be  regarded  as  predictable  and  risky.  Further- 
more, alternative  policies  may  tend  to  be  comfortable  extensions  of  existing 
policies,  or  improvements  on  them,  thus  avoiding  the  public  suspicion  of  inno- 
vation. In  an  area  such  as  weather  modification,  where  so  many  uncertainties 
exist,  and  where  the  determination  or  assigning  of  liability  and  responsibility 
are  far  from  having  been  perfected,  public  opposition  will  surely  be  aroused. 
Any  alternative  plan  or  combination  of  plans  will  have  its  own  social  effects, 
however,  and  it  is  the  overall  impact  of  an  alternative  plan  and  the  adverse 
effects  of  not  carrying  out  such  a  plan  which,  in  the  final  analysis,  should  guide 
decisions  on  alternative  action. 

6.  Finally,  it  is  important  to  recognize  that  the  benefits  from  a  weather  modi- 
fication program  may  depend  upon  the  ability  and  readiness  of  individuals 
to  change  their  modes  of  activity.  The  history  of  agricultural  extension  work 
in  the  United  States  suggests  that  this  can  be  done  successfully,  but  only  with 
some  time  lag,  and  at  a  substantial  cost.  Social  research  studies  suggest  that 
public  perception  of  flood,  earthquake,  and  storm  hazards  is  astonishingly  casual. 

Need  for  public  education  on  weather  modification 

The  previous  listing  of  social  implications  of  weather  modification 
was  significantly  replete  with  issues  derived  from  basic  human  atti- 
tudes. To  a  large  extent  these  attitudes  have  their  origin  in  lack  of  in- 
formation, misconceptions,  and  even  concerted  efforts  to  misinform  by 
organized  groups  which  are  antagonistic  to  weather  modification.  As 
capabilities  to  modify  weather  expand  and  applications  are  more  wide- 
spread, it  would  seem  probable  that  this  information  gap  would  also 
widen  if  there  are  no  explicit  attempts  to  remedy  the  situation.  "At  the 
very  least,"  according  to  Fleagle,  et  al.,  "a  large-scale  continuing  pro- 
gram of  education  (and  perhaps  some  compulsion)  will  be  required  if 
the  potential  social  gains  from  weather  modification  are  to  be  realized 
in  fact,"  48  Whether  such  educational  programs  are  mounted  by  the 
States  or  by  some  agency  of  the  Federal  Government  is  an  issue  of 
jurisdiction  and  would  likely  depend  on  whether  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment or  the  States  has  eventual  responsibility  for  management  of  op- 
erational weather  modification  programs.  Information  might  also  be 
provided  privately  by  consumer  groups,  professional  organizations, 
the  Aveather  modification  industry,  or  the  media. 

It  is  likely  that  educational  programs  would  be  most  effective  if  a 
variety  of  practical  approaches  are  employed,  including  use  of  the 
news  media,  publication  of  pamphlets  at  a  semitechnical  level,  semi- 
nars and  hearings,  and  even  formal  classes.  Probably  the  latter  cate- 
gories would  be  most  appropriate  for  civic  groups,  Government  offi- 
cials, businessmen,  or  other  interests  who  are  likely  to  be  directly 
affected  by  contemplated  operations. 

The  following  list  of  situations  are  examples  of  public  lack  of  under- 
standing which  could,  at  least  in  part,  be  remedied  through  proper 
educational  approaches : 

There  is  much  apprehension  over  claims  of  potential  d^rger  of  a 
long-lasting  nature  on  climate,  which  could  supposedly  result 
from  both  inadvertent  and  planned  modification  of  the  weather, 
with  little  insight  to  distinguish  between  the  causes  and  the  scales 
of  the  effects. 

There  have  been  extravagant  claims,  propagated  through  ig- 
norance or  by  deliberate  distortion  by  antagonistic  groups,  about 


48  Ibid.,  p.  40. 


22 


the  damaging  effects  of  cloud  seeding  on  ecological  systems,  human 
lien  1th.  and  air  and  water  quality. 

The  controversies  between  opposing  groups  of  scientists  on  the 
efficacy  of  weather  modification  technologies  and  between  scien- 
tists and  commercial  operators  on  the  readiness  of  these  technolo- 
gies for  application  has  engendered  a  mood  of  skepticism  and 
even  mistrust  of  weather  modification  on  the  part  of  a  public 
which  is  largely  uninformed  on  technical  matters. 

The  public  has  often  been  misinformed  by  popular  news  media, 
whose  reporters  seek  to  exploit  the  spectacular  in  popular  weather 
modification  "stories"  and  who,  themselves  usually  uninformed  in 
technical  aspects  of  the  subject,  tend  to  oversimplify  and  distort 
the  facts  associated  with  a  rather  complex  science  and  technology. 

There  has  been  an  organized  effort  on  the  part  of  groups  opposed 
to  weather  modification  to  mount  an  educational  program  which 
runs  counter  to  the  objectives  of  informing  the  public  about  the 
potential  benefits  of  a  socially  acceptable  technology  of  weather 
modification. 

Portions  of  the  public  have  acquired  a  negative  impression  that 
meteorologists  and  Government  officials  concerned  with  weather 
modification  are  irresponsible  as  a  result  of  past  use.  or  perceived 
present  and  future  use.  of  the  technology  as  a  weapon  of  war. 

Lack  of  information  to  the  public  has  sometimes  resulted  in 
citizen  anger  when  it  is  discovered  that  a  seeding  project  has  been 
going  on  in  their  area  for  some  time  without  their  having  been 
informed  of  it. 

Decisionmaking 

"The  nature  of  wenther  processes  and  the  current  knowledge  about 
them  require  that  most  human  decisions  as  to  weather  modification 
must  be  made  in  the  face  of  uncertainty.  This  imposes  special  re- 
straints on  public  agencies  and  it  increases  the  difficulty  of  predict- 
ing how  individual  farmers,  manufacturers,  and  others  who  are 
directly  affected  by  weather  would  respond  to  changes  in  leather 
Characteristics.5' 49  The  situation  since  1965  when  this  statement  was 
made  has  changed  little  with  resrard  to  predictability  of  weather 
processes  and  their  modification.  There  has  also  been  little  progress 
toward  developing  decisionmaking  processes  which  can  be  applied, 
should  the  need  arise,  on  whether  or  not  weather  modification  should 
be  emploved. 

A  number  of  studies  on  social  attitudes  indicate  that  the  preference 
of  most  cit  izens  is  that  decisionmaking  in  such  areas  as  use  or  restraint 
from  use  of  weather  modification  should  be  at  the  local  level.  owim>- 
to  the  feeling  that  citizens'  rights  and  property  are  best  protected 
when  decisions  are  made  bv  officials  over  whom  they  have  the  most 
direct;  control.  Farhar  savs  that  evidence  suggests  that  one  important 
condition  for  public  acceptance  of  weather  modification  technology 
is  public  involvement  in  the  decision  process,  especially  in  civic 
derisions.™  Procedures  must  then  be  developed  for  enabling  {peal 

49  Special  Commission  on  Wcnther  Modification.  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification." 
NRF  or,     irto.~.  p  uc. 

»  F.-irlisir.  Bar  nun)  P.  "The  Pnldie  Derides  Al<ont  Weather  Modification."'  Environment 

and  Behavior,  vol.  9.  No.  September  1 077.  p.  .".07. 


23 


officials,  probably  not  technically  trained,  to  make  such  decisions 
intelligently.  Such  decisions  must  be  based  both  on  information 
received  from  Federal  or  State  teclmical  advisers  and  on  the  opinions 
of  local  citizens  and  interest  groups. 

INTERNATIONAL  ISSUES 

International  agreements  regarding  weather  modification  experi- 
ments and  operations  have  been  very  limited.  There  exists  a  United 
States-Canada  agreement,  which  requires  consultation  and  notifica- 
tion of  the  other  country  when  there  is  the  possibility  that  weather 
modification  activities  of  one  country  could  affect  areas  across  the 
border.51  Earlier  understandings  were  reached  between  the  United 
States  and  Canada  concerning  experiments  over  the  Great  Lakes  and 
with  the  IJnited  Kingdom  in  connection  with  hurricane  modification 
research  in  the  Atlantic.52  Recent  attempts  to  reach  agreement  with 
the  Governments  of  Japan  and  the  People's  Republic  of  China  for 
U.S.  experiments  in  the  Far  East  on  modification  of  typhoons  were 
unsuccessful,  though  such  research  was  encouraged  by  the  Philip- 
pines. There  is  current  intention  to  reach  an  agreement  with  Mexico 
on  hurricane  research  in  the  eastern  Pacific  off  that  nation's  coast. 

During  1976,  25  nations  reported  to  the  World  Meteorological  Orga- 
nization that  they  had  conducted  weather  modification  activities.53 
There  have  been  two  principal  international  activities,  dealing  with 
somewhat  different  aspects  of  weather  modification,  in  recent  years. 
One  of  these  is  the  preparation  and  design  of  a  cooperative  experi- 
ment under  the  auspices  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization, 
called  the  Precipitation  Enhancement  Experiment  (PEP)  ;  while  the 
other  is  the  development  of  a  convention  by  the  United  Nations  on 
the  prohibition  of  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification.54 

The  following  international  considerations  on  research  and  opera- 
tional weather  modification  activities  can  be  identified : 

1.  There  is  a  common  perception  of  a  need  to  insure  that  the  current 
high  level  of  cooperation  which  exists  in  the  international  community 
with  regard  to  more  general  meteorological  research  and  weather  re- 
porting will  be  extended  to  development  and  peaceful  uses  of  planned 
weather  modification. 

2.  There  is  now  no  body  of  international  law  which  can  be  applied  to 
the  potentially  serious  international  questions  of  weather  modification, 
such  as  liability  or  ownership  of  atmospheric  water  resources.55 

3.  Past  use  by  the  United  States,  and  speculated  current  or  future 
use  by  various  countries,  of  weather  modification  as  a  weapon  have 
raised  suspicions  as  to  the  possible  intent  in  developing  advertent 
weather  modification  technology. 

4.  There  have  been  charges  that  weather  modification  research  activi- 
ties were  used  to  divert  severe  weather  conditions  away  from  the 

r,t  The  United  States-Canada  agreement  on  weather  modification  is  reproduced  in  nop.  F. 

52  Taubenfeld,  Howard  J.,  "National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976  ;  Interna- 
tional Agreements."  Background  paper  for  use  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  March  1977,  p.  13. 

53  See  table  1,  ch.  9,  p.  409. 

54  These  activities  and  other  international  aspects  of  weather  modification  are  discussed 
in  ch.  10. 

55  See  previous  section  on  legal  issues,  p.  17. 


24 


United  States  at  the  expense  of  other  countries  or  that  such  activities 
have  resulted  in  damage  to  the  environment  in  those  countries.56 

5.  As  in  domestic  research  projects,  there  are  allegations  of  insuffi- 
cient funding  over  periods  of  time  too  short  to  achieve  significant 
results  in  the  case  of  internationally  sponsored  experiments;  in  par- 
ticular, many  scientists  feel  that  a  means  should  be  devised  to  insure 
that  the  planned  Precipitation  Enhancement  Project  (PEP)  receives 
adequate  continuous  support. 

6.  Other  nations  should  be  consulted  with  regard  to  any  planned 
weather  modification  activities  by  the  United  States  which  might  con- 
ceivably affect,  or  be  perceived  to  affect,  those  countries. 

ECOLOGICAL  ISSUES 

The  body  of  research  on  ecological  effects  of  weather  modification 
is  limited  but  significantly  greater  than  it  was  a  decade  ago.  It  is 
still  true  that  much  remains  unknown  about  ecological  effects  of 
changes  to  weather  and  climate. 

Economically  significant  weather  modification  will  always  have  an 
eventual  ecological  effect,  although  appearance  of  that  effect  may  be 
hidden  or  delayed  by  system  resilience  and/or  confused  by  system 
complexity.  It  may  never  be  possible  to  predict  well  the  ecological 
effects  of  weather  modification;  however,  the  more  precisely  the 
weather  modifier  can  specify  the  effects  his  activities  will  produce  in 
terms  of  average  percentage  change  in  precipitation  (or  other  vari- 
ables), expected  seasonal  distribution  of  the  induced  change,  expected 
year-to-year  distribution  of  the  change,  and  changes  in  relative  form 
of  precipitation,  the  more  precise  can  be  the  ecologist's  prediction  of 
possible  ecological  effects. 

Ecological  effects  will  result  from  moderate  weather-related  shifts 
in  rates  of  reproduction,  growth,  and  mortality  of  plants  and  animals; 
they  will  rarely  be  sudden  or  catastrophic.  Accordingly,  weather  modi- 
fied ions  which  occur  with  regularly  over  time  are  the  ones  to  which 
biological  communities  will  react.  Adjustments  of  plant  and  animal 
communities  will  usually  occur  more  slowly  in  regions  of  highly  vari- 
able weather  than  in  those  with  more  uniform  conditions.  Deliberate 
weather  modification  is  likely  to  have  greater  ecological  impact  in 
semiarid  systems  and  less  impact  in  humid  ones.  Since  precipitation 
augmentation,  for  example,  would  have  the  greatest  potential  for  eco- 
nomic value  and  is,  therefore,  likely  to  have  its  greatest  potential  ap- 
plication in  such  areas,  the  ecological  impacts  in  transition  areas  will 
be  of  particular  concern. 

Although  widespread  cloud  seeding  could  result  in  local,  temporary 
increases  in  concentrations  of  silver  (from  the  most  commonly  used 
seeding  agent,  silver  iodide),  approaching  the  natural  quantities  in 
surface  waters,  the  exchange  rates  would  probably  be  an  order  of 
magnitude  Lower  than  the  natural  rates.  Even  in  localized  areas  of 
precipital  ion  management,  it  appears  I  hat  exchange  rates  will  be  many 
orders  of  magnitude  smaller  than  those  adversely  affecting  plants  and 
soils.  Further  research  is  required,  however,  especially  as  other  poten- 
tial seeding  agents  are  introduced. 

m  por  example  tbere  were  charges  that  attempts  to  mitigate  severe  effects  of  Hurricane 
Fifl  in  15>75  caused  devastat  ion  to  Honduras.  :i  charge  which  the  United  Nt;ites  officially 
denied,  since  no  hurricanes  had  been  seeded  under  Project  Stormfury  since  1971. 


CHAPTER  2 


HISTORY  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

The  history  of  the  desire  to  control  the  weather  can  be  traced  to 
antiquity.  Throughout  the  ages  man  has  sought  to  alleviate  droughts  or 
to  allay  other  severe  weather  conditions  which  have  adversely  affected 
him  by  means  of  magic,  supplication,  pseudoscientific  procedures  such 
as  creating  noises,  and  the  more  on  less  scientifically  based  techniques 
of  recent  times. 

The  expansion  in  research  and  operational  weather  modification 
projects  has  increased  dramatically  since  World  War  II;  nevertheless, 
activities  predating  this  period  are  of  interest  and  have  also  provided 
the  roots  for  many  of  the  developments  of  the  "modern"  period.  In  a 
1966  reprt  for  the  Congress  on  weather  modification,  Lawton  Hart- 
man  stated  three  reasons  why  a  review  of  the  history  of  the  subject 
can  be  valuable:  (1)  Weather  modification  is  considerably  older  than 
is  commonly  recognized,  and  failure  to  consider  this  fact  can  lead  to  a 
distorted  view  of  current  problems  and  progress.  (2)  Weather  modi- 
fication has  not  developed  as  an  isolated  and  independent  field  of  re- 
search, but  for  over  a  century  has  been  parallel  to  and  related  to 
progress  in  understanding  weather  processes  generally.  (3)  Earlier 
experiences  in  weather  modification  may  not  have  been  very  different 
from  contemporary  experiences  in  such  matters  as  experimental  de- 
sign, evaluation  of  results,  partially  successful  projects,  and  efforts  to 
base  experiments  on  established  scientific  principles.1 

Hartman  found  that  the  history  of  weather  modification  can  be 
conveniently  divided  into  five  partially  overlapping  periods.2  He  refers 
to  these  as  (1)  a  prescientific  period  (prior  to  about  1839);  (2)  an 
early  scientific  period  (extending  approximately  from  1839  through 
1891)  ;  (3)  a  period  during  which  elements  of  the  scientific  framework 
were  established  (from  about  1875  to  1933)  ;  (4)  the  period  of  the 
early  cloud-seeding  experiments  (1921  to  1946)  ;  and  (5)  the  modern 
period,  beginning  with  the  work  of  Langmuir,  Schaefer,  and  Vonne- 
gut  (since  1946).  This  same  organization  is  adopted  in  discussions 
below ;  however,  the  four  earlier  periods  are  collected  into  one  section, 
while  the  more  significant  history  of  the  extensive  activities  of  the 
post-1946  period  are  treated  separately. 


1  Hartman,  Lawton  M.,  "History  of  Weather  Modification. "  In  U.S.  Congress,  Senate 
Committee  on  Commerce  "Weather  Modification  and  Control."  Washington.  D.C  U.S. 
Government  Printing  Oflice,  1966  (89th  Cong.,  2d  sess..  Senate  Rept.  No.  1139:  prepared 
by  the  Legislative  Reference  Service,  the  Library  of  Congress,  at  the  request  of  Warren  G. 
Maemn«on) ,  p.  11. 

2  Ibid. 

(25) 


26 


History  or  Weather  Modification  Prior  to  1946 

PRESCIENTIFIC  PERIOD 

From  ancient  times  through  the  early  19th  century,  and  even  since, 
there  have  been  reported  observations  which  led  many  to  believe  that 
rainfall  could  be  induced  from  such  phenomena  as  great  noises  and 
extensive  fires.  Plutarch  is  reported  to  have  stated,  "It  is  a  matter  of 
current  observation  that  extraordinary  rains  pretty  generally  fall 
after  great  battles/' 3  Following  the  invention  of  gunpowder,  the  fre- 
quency of  such  claims  and  the  conviction  of  those  espousing  this 
hypothesis  increased  greatly.  Many  cases  were  cited  where  rain  fell 
shortly  after  large  battles,  A  practical  use  of  this  phenomenon  was  re- 
ported to  have  occurred  in  the  memoirs  of  Benvenuto  Cellini  when,  in 
1539  on  the  occasion  of  a  procession  in  Rome,  he  averted  an  impending 
rainstorm  by  firing  artillery  in  the  direction  of  the  clouds,  "which  had 
already  begun  to  drop  their  moisture."  4 

William  Humphreys jDOsed  a  plausible  explanation  for  the  appar- 
ently high  correlation  between  such  weather  events  and  preceding 
battles.  He  noted  that  plans  were  usually  made  and  battles  fought  in 
good  weather,  so  that  after  the  battle  in  the  temperate  regions  of 
Europe  or  North  America,  rain  will  often  occur  in  accordance  with 
the  natural  3-  to  5-day  periodicity  for  such  events.5  Even  in  modern 
times  there  was  the  conviction  that  local  and  global  weather  had  been 
adversely  affected  after  the  explosion  of  the  first  nuclear  weapons  and 
the  various  subsequent  tests  in  the  Pacific  and  elsewhere.0  Despite 
statements  of  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau  and  others  pointing  out  the 
fallacious  reasoning,  such  notions  became  widespread  and  persistent.7 

In  addition  to  these  somewhat  rational  though  unscientific  obser- 
vations, many  of  which  were  accompanied  by  testimony  of  reliable 
witnesses,  there  had  been,  and  there  still  exist  in  some  primitive  cul- 
tures, superstitions  and  magical  practices  that  accompany  weather 
phenomena  and  attempts  to  induce  changes  to  the  weather.  Daniel 
Halacy  relates  a  number  of  such  superstitiouslike  procedures  which 
have  been  invoked  in  attempts  to  bring  rain  to  crops  during  a  drought 
or  to  change  the1  weather  in  some  other  way  so  as  to  be  of  particular 
benefit  to  man : 8 

Primitive  rainmakers  would  often  use  various  intuitive  gestures,  such  as 
sprinkling  water  on  the  soil  that  they  wanted  the  heavens  to  douse,  Mowing 
mouthfuls  of  water  into  the  air  like  rain  or  mist,  hammering  on  drums  to  inu- 
la re  thunder,  or  throwing  firebrands  into  the  air  to  simulate  lightning. 

Women  would  carry  water  at  night  to  the  field  and  pour  it  out  to  coax  the 
skies  to  do  likewise. 

American  Indians  blew  water  from  special  pipes  in  imitation  of  the  rainfall. 

It  was  believed  that  frogs  came  down  in  the  rain  because  many  were  seen 
following  rain  :  therefore,  frogs  were  hung  from  trees  so  that  the  heavens  would 
pour  down  rain  upon  them. 

Sometimes  children  were  buried  up  to  their  necks  in  the  parched  ground  and 
then  cried  for  rain,  their  tears  providing  the  imitative  magic. 


Ward,  R.  !>«•  <\.  "Artificial  Rain  :  a  Review  of  the  Subject  to  the  Close  of  lSSft."  Amor- 
lean  Meteorological  Journal;  vol.  s.  May  1891-Aprtl  *S92,  p.  484. 
*  Ibid.,  n.  408. 

s  Humphreys.  William  -1  .  "Rain  Making  and  Other  Weather  Vagaries."  Baltimore,  The 
Williams  and  Wilkins  Co..  11*20.  p.  31, 

"Byers,  Horace  i:..   'History  of  Weather  Modification."  In  Wilnot  N.  Hess  (editor), 
"Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York.  Wiley,  1!)74,  p.  4. 
~  T'.id 

«  Halacy,  Daniel  S.,  Jr.,  "The  Weather  Changers,"  New  York.  Harper  &  Row.  1908.  pp. 


27 


In  China,  huge  paper  dragons  were  part  of  religious  festivals  to  bring  rain; 
if- drought  persisted,  the  dragon  was  angrily  torn  to  bits. 

North  American  Indians  roasted  young  women  from  enemy  tribes  over  a  slow 
fire,  then  killed  them  with  arrows  before  eating  their  hearts  and  burying  their 
remains  in  the  fields  they  wanted  irrigated  with  rainfall. 

Scottish  witches  conjured  up  the  wind  by  beating  a  stone  three  times  with  a 
rag  dipped  in  water,  among  intonations  like  those  of  characters  in  a  Shake- 
spearean play. 

New  Guinea  natives  used  wind  stones  upon  which  they  tapped  with  a  stick, 
the  force  of  the  blow  bringing  anything  from  a  zephyr  to  a  hurricane. 

Pregnant  women  in  Greenland  were  thought  to  be  able  to  go  outdoors,  take  a 
breath,  and  exhale  it  indoors  to  calm  a  storm. 

In  Scandinavian  countries  witches  sold  knotted  bits  of  string  and  cloth  which, 
supposedly,  contained  the  wind ;  untying  one  knot  at  sea  would  produce  a  mod- 
erate wind,  two  a  gale,  and  three  a  violent  storm. 

Australian  bushmen  thought  that  they  could  delay  the  Sun  by  putting  a  clod 
of  dirt  in  the  fork  of  a  tree  at  just  the  height  of  the  Sun,  or  hasten  its  departure 
by  blowing  sand  after  it. 

Bells  have  been  thought  to  prevent  hail,  lightning,  and  windstorms,  and  some- 
times they  are  still  rung  today  for  this  purpose. 

EARLY  SCIENTIFIC  PERIOD 

James  P.  Espy  was  a  19th  century  American  meteorologist  known 
especially  for  his  development  of  a  theon^  of  storms  based  on  convec- 
tion. Recognizing  that  a  necessary  condition  for  rainfall  is  the 
formation  of  clouds  by  condensation  of  water  vapor  from  rising  air, 
Espy  considered  that  rain  could  well  be  induced  artificially  when  air 
is  forced  to  rise  as  a  result  of  great  fires,  reviving  a  belief  of  the  pre- 
.scientific  era  but  using  scientific  rationale.  In  the  National  Gazette  in 
Philadelphia  of  April  5, 1839,  he  said  : 

From  principles  here  established  by  experiment,  and  afterward  confirmed  by 
observation,  it  follows,  that  if  a  large  body  of  air  is  made  to  ascend  in  a  column, 
a  large  cloud  will  be  generated  and  that  that  cloud  will  contain  in  itself  a  self- 
sustaining  power,  which  may  move  from  the  place  over  which  it  was  formed,  and 
cause  the  air  over  which  it  passes,  to  rise  up  into  it,  and  thus  form  more  cloud 
and  rain,  until  the  rain  may  become  more  general.8 

If  these  principles  are  just,  when  the  air  is  in  a  favorable  state,  the  bursting 
out  of  a  volcano  ought  to  produce  rain ;  and  such  is  known  to  be  the  fact ;  and 
I  have  abundant  documents  in  my  possession  to  prove  it. 

So,  under  very  favorable  conditions,  the  bursting  out  of  great  fires  ought  to 
produce  rain ;  and  I  have  many  facts  in  my  possession  rendering  it  highly 
probable,  if  not  certain,  that  great  rains  have  sometimes  been  produced  by  great 
fires.10 

Later  in  the  same  article  Espy  stated  that : 

From  these  remarkable  facts  above,  I  think  it  will  be  acknowledged  that  there 
is  some  connection  between  great  fires  and  rains  other  than  mere  coincidence. 
But  now.  when  it  is  demonstrated  by  the  most  decisive  evidence,  the  evidence 
of  experiment,  that  air,  in  ascending  into  the  atmosphere  in  a  column,  as  it  must 
do  over  a  great  fire,  will  cool  by  diminished  pressure,  so  much  that  it  will  begin 
to  condense  its  vapor  into  cloud.11 

Espy  postulated  three  mechanisms  which  could  prevent  great  fires 
from  providing  rain  at  all  times  when  they  occur:  (1)  If  there  is  a 
current  of  air  at  some  height,  it  sweeps  away  the  uprushing  current 
of  air;  (2)  the  dew-point  may  be  too  low  to  produce  rain  at  all:  and 
(3)  there  may  be  an  upper  stratum  of  air  so  light  that  the  rising 

9  Espy.  Tames  P..  "Artificial  Rains."  National  Gazette.  Philadelphia.  Apr.  5,  lSf!9.  Re- 
printed in  James  P.  Espy,  "Philosophy  of  Storms,"  Boston.  Little  &  Brown.  1841.  pd. 
493-494. 

10  Ibid.,  p.  494. 

11  Ibid.,  p.  496. 


28 


column  may  not  be  able  to  rise  far  enough  into  it  to  cause  rain.12  He 
proposed  an  experiment  in  which  he  would  set  fire  to  a  "large  mass 
of  combustibles,"  which  would  be  ready  for  the  right  circumstances 
and  at  a  time  of  drought.  He  added :  "Soon  after  the  fire  commences, 
I  will  expect  to  see  clouds  begin  to  form  *  *  *.  I  will  expect  to  see 
this  cloud  rapidly  increase  in  size,  if  its  top  is  not  swept  off  by  a 
current  of  air  at  a  considerable  distance  abov^e  the  Earth,  until  it 
becomes  so  lofty  as  to  rain.'-  13 

For  over  a  decade  Espy  served  as  an  adviser  to  the  Congress  on 
meteorological  problems.  He  proposed  in  1850  what  is  perhaps  the  first 
Fedora!  project  for  large-scale  weather  modification.  His  plan  included 
amassing  large  quantities  of  timber  in  the  Western  States  along  a 
600-  to  700-mile  north-south  line,  to  be  set  on  fire  simultaneously  at 
regular  T-day  intervals.  He  believed  that  this  fire  could  have  started 
a  "rain  of  great  length"  traveling  toward  the  East,  not  breaking  up 
until  reaching  "far  over  the  Atlantic  Ocean;  that  it  will  rain  over 
the  whole  country  east^of  the  place  of  beginning."  The  cost  of  this 
experiment  would  "not  amount  to  half  a  cent  a  year  to  each  individual 
in  the  United  States."  14  Congress  did  not  endorse  the  proposal  for 
reasons  which  are  unknown:  however.  Fleagle  speculates  that  perhaps 
this  failure  was  due  to  the  fact  that  Congress  had  not  yet  accustomed 
itself  to  appropriating  funds  for  scientific  enterprises.15 

There  was  continuing  controversy  over  whether  or  not  fire  could 
cause  increased  rainfall.  In  an  article  which  appeared  in  Nature  in 
1871,  J.  K.  Laughton  stated  that,  "The  idea  that  large  fires  do,  in  some 
way,  bring  on  rain,  is  very  old;  but  it  was,  I  believe,  for  the  first  time 
stated  as  a  fact  and  explained  on  scientific  grounds  by  the  late  Pro- 
fessor Espy."  10  Laughton  cited  instances  where  burning  brush  in  hot, 
dry  weather  did  not  result  in  any  rainfall,  and  he  concluded  that : 

Large  fires,  explosions,  battles,  and  earthquakes  do  tend  to  cause  atmospheric 
disturbance,  and  especially  to  induce  a  fall  of  rain  ;  but  that  for  the  tendency  to 
produce  effect,  it  is  necessary  that  other  conditions  should  be  suitable.  With 
regard  to  storms  said  to  have  been  caused  by  some  of  these  agencies,  the  evidence 
is  still  more  unsatisfactory  ;  and,  in  our  present  ignorance  of  the  cause  of  storms 
generally,  is  quite  insufficient  to  compel  us  to  attribute  any  one  particular  gale, 
extending  probably  over  a  wide  area,  to  some  very  limited  and  comparatively 
insignificant  disturbance.17 

The  1871  Chicago  fire  also  aroused  interest,  many  believing  that  the 
fire  was  stopped  by  the  rainfall  which  it  had  initiated.  Ward  cites  a 
telegram  of  the  time  sent  to  London  which  read  : 

This  fire  was  chiefly  checked  on  the  third  or  fourth  day  by  the  heavy  and  con- 
tinuous downpour  of  rain,  which  it  is  conjectured  is  partly  due  to  the  great  atmos- 
pheric disturbances  which  such  an  extensive  lire  would  cause,  especially  wben  we 
are  told  that  the  season  just  previous  to  the  outbreak  of  the  fire  had  been  par- 
ticularly dry." 


u  Ibid. 

1  ■  I  'id.,  p.  400. 

«  Espy,  James  P.,  "Second  Reporl  on  Meteorology  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy."  U.S. 
Senate.  Executive  Doctlmetats;  No.  89,  vol.  11,  ."{1st  Cong.,  1st  Bess.  Washington,  Wm.  M 
Belt  1850.  p.  20. 

us  Fleagle.  Robert  O..  "Background  and  Present  status  of  Weather  Modification."  In 
Robert  (i.  Flea  pie  (editor).  "Weather  Modification:  Science  and  Public  Policy."  University 
of  w  ah  inert  on  Press,  Seattle  1968,  p.  7. 

"'  Lautrhton.  J  K.,  "Can  Weather  lie  Influenced  bv  Artificial  Means?"  Nature,  Feb.  10. 
1871  i.  :•(»(; 

17  Ibid.,  p.  307. 

«  Reported  in  Ward.  "Artificial  Rain  :  a  Review  of  the  Subject  to  the  Close  of  1889,"  1*02. 
pp.  480-400. 


29 


On  the  other  hand,  Prof.  I.  A.  Lapham,  speaking  of  the  Chicago  fire, 
contradicted  the  previous  account,  saying : 

During  all  this  time — 24  hours  of  conflagration — no  rain  was  seen  to  fall,  nor 
did  any  rain  fall  until  4  o'clock  the  next  morning ;  and  this  was  not  a  very  con- 
siderable downpour,  but  only  a  gentle  rain,  that  extended  over  a  large  district  of 
country,  differing  in  no  respect  from  the  usual  rains.  It  was  not  until  4  days 
afterward  that  anything  like  a  heavy  rain  occurred.  It  is,  therefore,  quite  certain 
that  this  case  cannot  be  referred  to  as  an  example  of  the  production  of  rain  by  a 
great  fire.19 

Lapham  goes  on  to  say  that,  "The  case  neither  confirms  nor  dis- 
proves the  Espian  theory,  and  we  may  still  believe  the  well-authenti- 
cated cases  where,  under  favorable  circumstances  of  very  moist  air  and 
absence  of  wind,  rain  has  been  produced  by  very  large  fires."  20 

Prof.  John  Trowbridge  of  Harvard  reported  in  1872  on  his  experi- 
ments in  which  he  investigated  the  influence  of  flares  on  atmospheric 
electricity.  Noting  that  the  normal  atmospheric  state  is  positive  and 
that  clearing  weather  is  often  preceded  by  a  change  from  negative  to 
positive  charge,  he  suggested  that  perhaps  large  fires  may  influence  the 
production  of  rain  by  changing  the  electrical  state  of  the  atmosphere, 
since,  in  his  tests,  his  flame  tended  "to  reduce  the  positive  charge  of 
electricity  which  generally  characterizes  the  air  of  fine  weather."  21  He 
concluded  by  saying:  "The  state  of  our  knowledge,  however,  in  regard 
to  the  part  that  electricity  plays  in  atmospheric  changes  is  very  meager. 
The  question  of  the  truth  of  the  popular  belief  that  great  fires  are  fol- 
lowed by  rain  still  remains  unanswered."  22 

Meanwhile,  H.  C.  Russel,  president  of  the  Royal  Society  of  South 
Wales  and  government  astronomer,  attempted  to  dispel  the  ideas  that 
both  cannonading  and  great  fires  could  be  used  to  produce  rain.  He 
hypothesized  that,  if  fire  were  to  have  such  an  effect,  rain  should  arrive 
within  48  hours  following  the  fire.  Reviewing  the  records  of  42  large 
fires  (including  two  explosions)  covering  a  21-year  period,  Russel 
concluded  that  there  was  not  one  instance  in  which  rain  followed 
within  48  hours  as  an  evident  consequence  of  the  fire.  He  further  cal- 
culated that  to  get  increased  rainfall  of  60  percent  over  a  land  surface 
of  52,000  square  feet  at  Sidney  would  require  9  million  tons  of  coal  per 
day,  in  an  effort  to  show  what  magnitude  of  energy  expenditure  was 
necessary  and  how  futile  such  an  attempt  would  be.23 

Toward  the  latter  part  of  the  19th  century  there  were  a  number  of 
ideas  and  devices  invented  for  producing  rain  artificially.  In  1880 
David  Ruggles  of  Virginia  patented  what  he  said  was  "a  new  and  use- 
ful mode  of  producing  rain  or  precipitating  rainfalls  from  rainclouds, 
for  the  purpose  of  sustaining  vegetation  and  for  sanitary  purposes." 
His  plan  included  a  scheme  by  which  balloons  carrying  explosives  were 
sent  up  into  the  air,  the  explosives  to  be  detonated  in  the  upper  air  "by 
electric  currents."  24 


19  Lanham,  I.  A..  "The  Great  Fires  of  1871  in  the  Northwest."  The  Journal  of  the  Frank- 
lin Institute,  vol.  64,  No.  1.  July  1872,  pp.  46-47. 

20  IMd.,  p.  47. 

21  Trowlirirtge,  John,  "Great  Fires  and  Rain-storms."  The  Popular  Science  Monthly,  vol.  2, 
December  1872.  p.  211. 

22  Tbid. 

23  Report  of  an  address  bv  H.  C.  Russel  was  given  in  Science,  vol.  3,  No.  55,  Feb.  22.  1884, 
pp.  229-230. 

24  "New  Method  of  Precipitating  Rain  Falls,"  Scientific  American,  vol.  43,  Aug.  14.  1S80, 
p.  106. 


30 


G.  H.  Bell  suggested  a  rainmaking  device,  consisting  of  a  hollow 
tower  1.500  feet  high,  through  which  air  was  to  be  blown  into  the 
atmosphere,  the  volume  of  the  up-rushing  air  to  be  increased  through 
use  of  a  s}^stem  of  tubes  around  the  tower.  The  inventer  consider  that 
the  same  system  could  be  used  to  prevent  rain,  by  reversing  the  blower 
so  that  the  descending  air  might  "annihilate"  the  clouds.25 

Still  other  schemes  and  contrivances  were  proposed  and  patented. 
J.  B.  Atwater  was  granted  a  patent  in  1887  for  a  scheme  to  dissipate 
tornadoes  by  detonating  an  explosive  charge  in  their  centers,  and  an- 
other was  granted  to  Louis  Gathman  in  1891  for  seeding  clouds  for  rain 
by  exploding  a  shell  containing  "liquid  carbonic  acid  gas"  at  cloud 
height,20  the  latter  concept  antedating  by  over  50  years  the  more  recent 
carbon  dioxide  seeding  projects. 

There  continued  to  be  adherents  to  the  idea  that  explosions  could 
cause  rainfall.  This  belief  was  reinforced  by  "evidence"  of  such  a  con- 
nection in  a  book  by  Edward  Powers,  called  "War  and  the  Weather," 
published  in  1871  and  1890  editions,  in  which  the  author  recounted  the 
instances  in  which  rain  followed  battles,  mostly  from  North  America 
and  Europe  during  the  19th  century.27 

Powers  was  convinced  that : 

The  idea  that  rain  can  be  produced  by  human  agency,  though  sufficiently 
startling,  is  not  one  which,  in  this  age  of  progress,  ought  to  be  considered  as 
impossible  of  practical  realization.  Aside  from  its  connection  with  the  supersti- 
tions of  certain  savage  tribes,  it  is  an  opinion  of  comparatively  recent  origin,  and 
is  one  which  cannot  be  regarded  as  belonging,  in  any  degree,  to  a  certain  class  of 
notions  which  prevail  among  the  unthinking;  *  *  *  on  the  contrary,  it  is  one 
which  is  confined  principally  to  those  who  are  accustomed  to  draw  conclusions 
only  from  adequate  premises,  and  *  *  *  founded  on  facts  which  have  come  under 
their  own  observation.28 

In  tones  somewhat  reminding  us  of  those  urging  a  greater  Federal 
research  effort  in  recent  years,  Powers  proposed  that  experiments  be 
undertaken  for  economic  benefit : 

Judging  from  the  letters  which  I  have  received  since  commencing  in  1870  an 
attempt  to  bring  forward  the  subject  of  rains  produced  by  cannon  tiring.  I  believe 
that  the  country  would  regard  with  interest  some  experiments  in  the  matter,  and 
would  not  begrudge  the  expense,  even  if  they  should  prove  unsuccessful  in  leading 
to  a  practical  use  of  the  principle  under  discussion.  In  some  matters  connected 
wTith  science,  the  Government  has  justly  considered  that  an  expenditure  of  public 
funds  was  calculated  to  be  of  public  benefit:  but  where,  in  anything  of  tiie  kind 
it.  has  ever  undertaken,  has  there  been  so  promising  a  field  for  such  actions  as 
here?20 

Powers,  upon  examining  the  records  of  many  battles,  said  : 

Let  us  proceed  to  facts — facts  not  one  of  which,  perhaps,  would  be  of  a  in- 
significance if  it  stood  alone  and  unsupported  by  the  others;  but  which,  taken 
in  the  aggregate,  furnish  the  strongest  evidence  that  heavy  artillery  firing 
has  an  influence  on  the  weather  and  tends  to  bring  rain. 11 

Perhaps  influenced  by  the  arguments  of  Powers  and  others,  in 
1890  the  U.S.  Congress  had  become  so  much  interested  in  and  gained 

Another  Ka in  Controller."  Scientific  American,  vol.  4:{.  Aug,  21.  1SSO.  p  11M. 

26  Harrington,  Mark  W..  "Weather-making,  Ancient  and  Modern,"  Smithsonian  Institu- 
tion Annual  Report,  to  July  1894,  pp.  249  1270. 

-'■  I'owers.  IMward.  "War  and  the  Weather."  Delavan.  Wis..  10.  Powers.  1890,  revised 
edition,  202  pp.  (An  earlier  edition  was  published  in  Chicago  in  1871.  Incidentally,  the 
plates  for  the  first  edition  were  deal  roved  in  the  Chicago  lire,  and  I'owers  did  not  have  an 
opportunity  to  complete  his  revision  until  1890. ) 

-*  Ihid..  p.  5. 

■  Ihid..  p.  143. 

*  Ihid.,  p.  11. 


31 


such  faith  in  the  possibility  of  weather  modification  that  funds 
we  re  appropriated  to  support  experiments  to  be  carried  out  under 
the  auspices  of  the  Forestry  Division  of  the  U.S.  Department  of 
Agriculture.  The  initial  $2?0p0  appropriated  was  increased  first  to 
$7,000,  and  finally  to  $10,000.  in  the  first  federally  sponsored  weather 
modification  project.  Of  the  total  appropriated.  $9,000  was  to  be 
spent  on  held  experiments.  Gen.  Robert  St.  George  Dyrenforth  was 
selected  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture  to  direct  these  tests,  hav- 
ing earlier  conducted  tests  near  Utiea,  X.Y.,  and  Washington,  D.C.. 
using  balloons  and  rockets  carrying  explosives.  The  principal  ex- 
periments were  executed  near  Midland,  Tex.,  using  a  variety  of  ex- 
plosive devices,  detonated  singly  and  in  volleys,  both  on  the  ground 
and  in  the  air.31 

According  to  an  interesting  account  by  Samuel  Hopkins  Adam-. 
Dyrenforth  arrived  in  Texas  on  a  hot  day  in  August  1891  with  a 
company  of  80  workers,  including  "*  *  *  chemists,  weather  observers, 
balloon  operators,  electricians,  kitefiiers,  gunners,  minelayers,  sap- 
pers, engineers,  and  laborers  *  *  *  together  with  some  disinterested 
scientists,  who  were  to  serve  as  reporters."  32  Adams  discusses  the  ap- 
paratus which  Dyrenforth  took  with  him  : 

The  expedition's  equipment  was  impressive.  There  were  68  balloons  of  from  10 
to  12  feet  in  diameter,  and  one  of  20  feet — all  to  be  hlled  with  an  explosive  mixture 
of  hydrogen  and  oxygen.  There  were  also  sixty  6-inch  mortars,  made  of  pipe,  and 
several  tons  of  rackarock  (a  terrifying  blend  of  potassium  chlorate  and  nitro- 
benzol  that,  was  the  general's  favorite  "explodent"  >,  dynamite,  and  blasting 
powder.  Finally,  there  were  the  makings  of  a  hundred  kites,  to  be  assembled  on  the 
scene,  and  sent  up  with  sticks  of  dynamite  lashed  to  them.  The  congressional 
$9,000  fell  considerably  short  of  sufficing  for  so  elaborate  an  outfit,  but  expectant 
Texans  chipped  in  with  liberal  contributions  and  the  railroads  helped  out  by  sup- 
plying free  transportation.1" 

Dyrenforth  carried  out  five  series  of  trials  during  1891  and  1892  : 
one  period  of  sustained  cannonading  coincided  with  a  heavy  down- 
pour, and  the  apparent  connection  provided  support  to  the  credi- 
bility of  many  people,  who  accepted  the  hypotheses  as  confirmed. 
Dyrenforth  gave  optimistic  and  promising  reports  of  his  results: 
however,  meterologists  and  other  scientists  were  critical  of  his  work. 
It  does  not  appear  that  the  Forestry  Division  was  fervently  ad- 
vocating the  research  program  for  which  it  had  responsibility.  In 
1891,  Bernhard  E.  Fernow,  Chief  of  the  Division  of  Forestry,  re- 
ported to  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  his  sentiments  regarding  the 
experiments  which  were  to  be  conducted  in  the  coming  summer,  with 
a  caution  reminiscent  of  the  concerns  of  many  meterologists  of  the 
1970°s : 

The  theories  in  regard  to  the  causes  of  storms,  and  especially  their  local  and 
temporal  distribution,  are  still  incomplete  and  unsatisfactory.  It  can  by  no  means 
be  claimed  that  we  know  all  the  causes,  much  less  their  precise  action  in  precipi- 
tation. It  would,  therefore,  be  presumptuous  to  deny  any  possible  effects  of  ex- 
plosions ;  but  so  far  as  we  now  understand  the  forces  and  methods  in  precipitating 
rain,  there  seems  to  be  no  reasonable  ground  for  the  expectation  that  they  will  be 
effective.  We  may  say,  then,  that  at  this  stage  of  meteorological  knowledge  we 
are  not  justified  in  expecting  any  results  from  trials  as  proposed  for  the  predtre- 
tion  of  artificial  rainfall,  and  that  it  were  better  to  increase  this  knowledge  first 


31  Fleagle.  "Background  and  Present  Status  of  Weather  Modification."  1968,  pp.  7-8. 

32  Adams.  Samuel  Hopkins.  The  New  Yorker.  Oct.  9,  1952,  pp.  93-100. 
*>  Ibid.,  i«.  !.'4. 


32 


by  simple  laboratory  investigations  and  experiments  preliminary  to  experiment 
on  a  larger  scale.34 

In  1893,  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  asked  for  no  more  public  funds 
for  support  of  this  project.35 

Fleagle  tells  about  the  use  of  36  "hail  cannons"  by  Albert  Stiger,  a 
town  burgomaster,  on  the  hills  surrounding  his  district  in  Austria  in 
1896: 

Tbe  hail  cannon  consisted  of  a  vertically  pointing  three-centimeter  mortar 
above  which  was  suspended  the  smokestack  of  a  steam  locomotive.  This  device 
not  only  produced  an  appalling  sound,  but  also  created  a  smoke  ring  a  meter  or 
more  in  diameter  which  ascended  at  about  one  hundred  feet  per  second  and 
produced  a  singing  note  lasting  about  ten  seconds.  Initial  successes  were  impres- 
sive, and  the  hail  cannon  was  widely  and  rapidly  copied  throughout  central 
Europe.  Accidental  injuries  and  deaths  were  numerous,  and  in  1902  an  inter ua- 
tional  conference  was  called  by  the  Austrian  government  to  assess  the  effects  of 
the  hail  cannon.  The  conference  proposed  two  tests,  one  in  Austria  and  one  in 
Italy,  the  results  of  which  thoroughly  discredited  the  device.36 

Though  unsuccessful,  the  work  of  Dyrenforth  and  others  had  in- 
spired belief  in  the  possibilities  of  drought  alleviation  such  that  a 
number  of  unscrupulous  "rainmakers"  were  able  to  capitalize  on  the 
situation.  Halacy  gives  an  account  of  a  famous  rainmaker  of  the  early 
20th  century,  Charles  Warren  Hatfield,  who  operated  for  about  10 
years  in  the  western  United  States.  With  a  25-foot  platform  and  a 
secret  device  for  dispensing  chemicals,  he  claimed  to  create  rain  over 
extensive  areas.  In  1916.  Hatfield  contracted  with  the  city  of  San  Diego 
to  alleviate  drought  conditions  and  was  to  be  paid  $1,000  for  each  inch 
of  rain  produced.  When  20  inches  of  rain  coincidentally  fell  nearby, 
the  resulting  floods  destroyed  a  dam,  killed  17  people,  and  produced 
millions  of  dollars  damage.  Hatfield,  faced  with  a  choice  of  assuming 
financial  responsibility  for  the  lawsuits  or  leaving  the  city  without  pay, 
chose  the  latter.37 

One  of  Hatfield's  accomplices  was  a  colorful  racetrack  reporter  from 
Xew  York,  who  met  and  joined  Hatfield  in  California  in  1912,  named 
James  Stuart  Aloysius  MacDonald,  alias  Colonel  Stingo,  "the  Honest 
Rainmaker."  Over  his  half -century  career  as  a  writer,  mostly  for  var- 
ious horseracing  journals.  MacDonald  reportedly  involved  himself  in 
various  schemes  for  quick  profit,  including  weather  changing  projects 
on  both  the  west  and  east  coasts.  Contracts  with  clients  were  drawn  up 
with  terms  for  remuneration  that  resembled  very  much  the  language 
of  success  or  failure  at  the  racetrack.  By  his  own  admission,  Mac- 
Donald  based  his  odds  for  success  on  past  weather  data  for  a  given 
area,  which  he  obtained  from  records  of  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau  or 
the  Xew  York  Public  Library.88  MacDonald,  or  Colonel  Stingo,  was 
the  inspiration  for  a  Broadway  play  called  "The  Rainmaker"  which 
opened  in  1954. 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  SCIENTIFIC  FUNDAMENTALS 

Espy's  L839  proposal  for  an  experiment  on  the  production  of  con- 
vection currents  and  water  vapor  condensation  at  high  altitudes  was 

■A  Fernow,  Rernhard  E..  in  report  to  Jeremiah  McClain  Rusk.  Secretary  of  Agriculture, 
1891,  an  reported  in  Ward,  "Artificial  Rain  ;  a  Review  of  the  Subject  to  the  Close  of  1889." 
1882.  p.  492. 

•  livers.  "History  of  Weather  .Modification."  1 1*74.  p.  5. 
38  Fleajcle.  "Rackpronnd  and  Present  Status  of  Weather  Modification,"  1968,  p.  9. 
:t7  Halacy,  "The  Weather  Changers,"  1968,  pp.  68  69. 
38  Liebling,  A.  J.,  "Profiles,"  The  New  Yorker,  Sept.  20,  1902,  pp.  43-71. 


33 


based  on  sound  physical  principles.  Since  knowledge  of  atmospheric 
processes  was  expanding  and  unfolding  rapidly  at  the  time,  Hartman 
reminds  us  that  the  limited  usefulness  of  Espy's  weather  modification 
concepts  should  not  be  ascribed  to  faulty  logic,  but  rather  to  the  primi- 
tive understanding  at  the  time  of  the  complex  processes  in  precipita- 
tion, many  of  which  are  still  not  understood  satisfactorily.39 

The  understanding  which  meteorologists  have  today  about  precipi- 
tation has  been  learned  slowly  and  sometimes  painfull}^,  and,  while 
many  of  the  discoveries  haA'e  resulted  from  20th  century  research, 
some  important  findings  of  the  latter  part  of  the  19th  century  are 
fundamental  to  these  processes.  Important  results  were  discovered  in 
1875  by  Coulier  in  France  on  foreign  contaminant  particles  in  the 
normal  atmosphere,  and  quantitative  measurements  of  the  concentra- 
tions of  these  particles  were  achieved  by  Aitken  in  1879.  These  events 
established  a  basis  for  explaining  the  fundamental  possibility  for 
occurrence  of  precipitation.  Earlier,  it  had  been  learned  that  high 
supersaturations  were  required  for  the  formation  of  water  droplets.40 
Aitken  was  the  first  to  imply  that  there  are  two  types  of  nuclei,  those 
with  an  affinity  for  water  vapor  (hygroscopic  particles)  and  nuclei 
that  require  some  degree  of  supersaturation  in  order  to  serve  as  con- 
densation centers.  The  Swedish  chemist-meteorologists  of  the  1920's 
developed  a  theory  of  condensation  on  hygroscopic  nuclei  and  showed 
the  importance  of  sea-salt  particles.  In  the  1930's  in  Germany  and  the 
United  Kingdom,  a  series  of  measurements  were  conducted  on  the 
numbers  and  sizes  of  condensation  nuclei  by  Landsberg,  Judge,  and 
Wright.  Data  from  measurements  near  Frankfurt,  augmented  sub- 
sequently by  results  from  other  parts  of  the  world,  have  been  adopted 
as  the  standard  of  reference  for  condensation  nuclei  worldwide.41 

At  the  beginning  of  the  1930's  important  aspects  of  cloud  phys' 
were  not  yet  understood.  In  particular,  the  importance  of  thp  ic,ri  phu 
to  precipitation  was  not  yet  clarified,  though,  ever  since  the  turn  of 
the  century  meteorologists  were  aware  that  water  droplets  were  abun- 
dantly present  in  clouds  whose  temperatures  were  well  below  the  freez- 
ing point.  Little  was  known  about  the  microphysics  of  nucleation  of  ice 
crystals  in  clouds ;  however,  it  had  been  noted  that  rains  fell  only  after 
visible  glaeiation  of  the  upper  parts  of  the  clouds.  Understanding 
of  these  processes  was  essential  before  scientific  seeding  of  clouds  for 
weather  modification  could  be  pursued  rationally.  In  1933  Tor  Berg-er- 
on  presented  and  promulgated  his  now  famous  theory  on  the  initiation 
of  precipitation  in  clouds  containing  a  mixture  of  liquid  and  ice. 
W.  Findeisen  expanded  on  Bergeron's  ideas  and  published  a  clearer 
statement  of  the  theory  in  1938 ;  consequently,  the  concept  is  generally 
known  as  the  Bergeron-Findeisen  theory.42  in  his  investigation  of  the 
formation  of  ice  crystals,  Findeisen  was  of  the  opinion  that  they  crys- 
talled directly  from  the  vapor  (that  is,  by  sublimation)  rather  than 
freezing  from  droplets.  He  also  conjectured  that  quartz  crystals  might 
be  the  nuclei  responsible  for  this  process  and  even  foresaw  that  the 
mechanism  might  be  initiated  artificially  by  introducing  suitable 
nuclei.43 


33  Hartman,  "Weather  Modification  and  Control,"  1966,  p.  13. 

40  Ibid. 

41  Bvers.  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  p.  7. 

42  Ibid.,  p.  8. 

*»  Ibid.,  pp.  8-9. 

34-857—79  5 


34 


Findeisen  stated  emphatically  that  rain  of  any  importance  must 
originate  in  the  form  of  snow  or  hail,  though  Bergeron  had  admitted 
the  occurrence  of  warm  rain  in  the  tropics.  Though  many  meteorolo- 
gists doubted  that  the  ice  crystal  process  was  an  absolute  requirement 
for  rain,  they  had  been  unable  to  collect  evidence  from  aircraft  obser- 
vations. In  Germany  aerological  evidence  was  obtained  on  the  growth 
of  rain  drops  by  the  collision-coalescence  process  in  "warm"  clouds, 
but  the  papers  on  this  work  were  published  in  1940,  and  World  War 
II  restricted  communication  of  the  results  to  meteorologists  world- 
wide. Meanwhile  in  the  United  States,  papers  were  published  on  the 
theory  of  the  warm  rain  process.  In  1938,  Houghton  showed  that  pre- 
cipitation could  be  started  by  either  the  Bergeron  process  or  by  the 
collision-coalescence  process.  He  noted  that  drops  could  be  formed  by 
condensation  on  "giant"  hygroscopic  nuclei  present  in  the  air  and  that 
growth  of  droplets  to  raindrop  size  was  possible  through  collision. 
G.  C  Simpson  elucidated  further  on  condensation  and  precipitation 
processes  in  1941,  disagreeing  with  Findeiseivs  rejection  of  "warm" 
rain  formation  by  the  collision-coalescence  process.44 

EARLY   CLOUD-SEEDIXG  EXPERIMENTS 

Starting  about  1920  and  continuing  for  about  two  decades  until 
the  outbreak  of  World  War  II,  there  were  a  number  of  experiments 
and  operations  intended  to  produce  rain  or  modify  the  weather  in 
some  other  way.  Although  some  of  these  activities  were  pusued  in  a 
scientific  manner,  others  were  less  so  and  were  directed  at  producing 
immediate  results;  all  of  these  projects  lacked  the  benefit  of  the  funda- 
mental knowledge  of  precipitation  processes  that  was  to  be  gained 
later  during  this  same  period,  the  discoveries  of  which  are  discussed 
in  the  preceding  subsection.  Various  schemes  during  this  period  in- 
cluded the  dispensing  of  materials  such  as  dust,  electrified  sand,  dry 
ice,  liquid  air,  and  various  chemicals,  and  even  the  old  idea  that  explo- 
sions can  bring  rain.  Field  tests  were  conducted  in  the  United  States, 
Germany,  the  Netherlands^  and  the  Soviet  Union. 

Byers  tells  .about  the  experimental  work  of  Dr.  E.  Leon  Chaffee, 
professor  of  physics  at  Harvard,  who  became  interested  in  the  possi- 
bility of  making  cloud  particles  coalesce  by  sprinkling  electrically 
charged  sand  over  the  clouds : 

Dr.  Chaffee  became  enthusiastic  about  the  idea  and  developed  in  his  laboratory 
a  nozzle  tor  charging  sand  and  dispersing  it  from  an  airplane.  The  nozzle  could 
deliver  sand  grains  having  surface  gradients  of  the  order  of  1.000  V/ein.  Flight 
experiments  were  carried  out  in  August  and  Seprcmber  of  1024  at  Aberdeen, 
Md..  with  an  airplane  scattering  the  sand  particles  in  the  clear  air  above  clouds 
having  tops  at  n.ooo  to  10,000  feet.  Dr.  Chaffee  reported  "success*'  in  the  reverse 
sense,  in  that  several  clouds  were  observed  to  dissipate  after  treatment.  The  tests 
were  well  publicized  in  newspapers  and  scientific  news  journals,  and  this  author, 
then  a  freshman  at  the  University  of  California,  recalls  that  his  physics  pro- 
fessors were  enthusiastic  about  the  idea.  Chaffee's  results  probably  would  not 
endure  the  type  of  statistical  scrutiny  to  which  experiments  of  this  kind  are 
subject  today.43 

Chaffee  considered  several  trials  successful,  since  clouds  were  dis- 
sipated after  being  sprayed  with  the  charged  sand.  It  has  been  pointed 


"  Ibid  .  p.  9. 
«  Ibid.,  p.  5. 


35 


out,  however,  in  view  of  the  much  greater  experience  in  recent  years, 
that  scientists  must  be  extremely  cautious  in  ascribing  success  in  such 
experiments,  when  the  evidence  is  based  largely  on  visual  obser- 
vations.4'1 

In  the  Netherlands,  August  Veraart  successfully  produced  rain  by 
seeding  clouds  with  dry  ice  from  a  small  aircraft  in  1930.  This  was 
16  years  before  the  work  at  General  Electric  in  the  United  States,  when 
clouds  were  also  seeded  with  dry  ice,  initiating  the  modern  period  in 
the  history  of  weather  modification.  Since  Veraart  probably  did  not 
understand  the  mechanism  involved  in  the  precipitation  process  which 
he  triggered,  ho  did  not  realize  that  the  dry  ice  was  effective  in  develop- 
ment of  ice  crystals  by  cooling  supercooled  clouds,  and  his  success  was 
likely  only  a  coincidence.  Byers  observes  that  Veraart's  vague  con- 
cepts on  changing  the  thermal  structure  of  clouds,  modifying  tem- 
perature inversions,  and  creating  electrical  effects  were  not  accepted, 
however,  by  the  scientific  community.47  He  claimed  to  be  a  true  rain- 
maker and  made  wide,  sweeping  claims  of  his  successes.  He  died  in 
19o*2,  a  year  before  Bergeron's  theory  appeared,  not  aware  of  the  theo- 
retical basis  for  his  work.48 

Partly  successful  experiments  on  the  dissipation  of  fog  were  con- 
ducted by  the  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology  in  the  1930s, 
under  the  direction  of  Henry  G.  Houghton.  At  an  airfield  near  Round 
Hill,  Mass.,  fog  was  cleared  using  sprays  of  water-absorbing  solutions, 
particularly  calcium  chloride,  as  well  as  fine  particles  of  dry  hygro- 
scopic material.  Results  of  these  experiments,  which  predated  some  of 
the  present-day  foo-  dispersal  attempts  bv  some  30  vears,  were  reported 
in  1938. 19 

Weather  Modification  Sixce  1946 


CHRONOLOGY 


The  following  chronology  of  "critical  events"  relating  to  weather 
modification  policy,  compiled  by  Fleagle.  unfolds  only  some  of  the 
major  events  and  activity  periods  which  have  occurred  since  the  his- 
toric discoveries  of  1946 : 50 

1946  :  Schaefer  demonstrated  seeding:  with  dry  ice. 

1947  :  Vonnegut  demonstrated  seeding  with  silver  iodide. 

1947-55 :  Irving  Langmuir  advertised  weather  modifieaton  widely  and  aggres- 
sively. 

1947-  53:  General  Electric  field  experiments  ("Cirrus")  extended  evidence 
that  clouds  can  he  deliherately  modified,  but  failed  to  demonstrate  large  effects. 

1948-  50:  Weather  Bureau  Cloud  Physics  Project  on  cumulus  and  stratiform 
clouds  resulted  in  conservative  estimate  of  effects. 

1948-52 :  Commercial  operations  grew  to  cover  10  percent  of  United  States. 

1950:  Report  of  Panel  on  Meteorology  of  Defense  Department's  Research  and 
Development  Board  (Haurwitz,  Chairman)  was  adverse  to  Langmuir's  claims. 

1953:  Public  Law  83-256  established  President's  Advisory  Committee  on 
Weather  Control. 


45  McDonald.  James  E..  "An  Historical  Note  on  an  Early  Cloud-Modification  Experiment. 
Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  42.  No.  3,  March  1961,  p.  19o. 

47  Byers.  "History  of  Weather  Modification."  1947.  p.  6. 

48  Hartman.  "Weather  Modification  and  Control."  1966.  p.  15.  ,      ,  „ 

»  Houghton.  Henrr  G..  and  W.  H.  Radford.  "On  the  Local  Dissipation  of  Natural  bog. 
Papers  in  Physical  Oceanography  and  Meteorology.  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology 
and  Woods  Hole  Oceanographic  Institution,  vol.  6,  No.  3.  Cambridge  and  Woods  Hole,  Mass., 
October  1938,  63  pp.  ,      „    -      ..     „  „  . 

50  Fleagle.  Robert  G  .  "An  Analysis  of  Federal  Policies  in  \\  eather  Modification.  Back- 
ground paper  prepared  for  use  by  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification 
Advisory  Board.  Seattle.  Wash.,  March  1977.  pp.  3-5. 


36 


1953-54:  "Petterssen"  Advisory  Committee  organized  field  tests  on  storm  sys- 
tems, convective  clouds,  and  cold  and  warm  fog  (supported  by  the  Office  of 
Naval  Research,  the  Air  Force,  the  Army  Signal  Corps,  and  the  Weather 
Bureau).  These  statistically  controlled  experiments  yielded  results  which  have 
been  substantially  unchanged  in  subsequent  tests. 

1957:  Report  of  Advisory  Committee  (Orville,  Chairman)  concluded  that  tests 
showed  15  percent  increase  in  orographic  winter  precipitation. 

1957 :  Major  cut  in  research  support  across  the  board  by  Defense  Department 
sends  major  perturbation  through  research  structure. 

195S:  Public  Law  85-510  assigned  lead  agency  responsibility  to  the  National 
Science  Foundation  (NSF). 

1959:  Commercial  operations  had  diminished  to  cover  about  one  percent  of 
the  United  States. 

1961 :  First  hurricane  seeding  under  Project  Stormfury. 

1961 :  Bureau  of  Reclamation  authorized  by  Congress  to  conduct  research  in 
weather  modification. 

1961 :  RAND  report  on  weather  modification  emphasized  complexity  of  atmos- 
pheric processes  and  interrelation  of  modification  and  prediction. 

1962-70:  Randomized  field  experiments  established  magnitude  of  orographic 
effects. 

1964:  Preliminary  report  of  National  Academy  of  Sciences/Committee  on 
Atmospheric  Sciences  (NAS/CAS)  roused  anger  of  private  operators  and  stimu- 
lated the  evaluation  of  operational  data. 

1964-present :  Department  of  the  Interior  pushed  the  case  for  operational  seed- 
ing to  augment  water  supplies. 

1966:  NAS/CAS  report  1S50  laid  the  basis  for  expanded  Federal  programs. 

1966 :  Report  of  NSF  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification  and  an  NSF 
symposium  called  attention  to  social,  economic,  and  legal  aspects. 

1966:  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS)  report 
f  Newell,  Chairman)  proposed  expanded  Federal  support  to  $90  million  by  1970. 

1966-  68 :  Efforts  of  the  Departments  of  Commerce  and  Interior  to  gain  lead 
agency  status  were  unsuccessful. 

1967:  ICAS  recommended  that  Commerce  be  designated  as  lead  agency. 
1967:  S.  2916,  assigning  lead  agency  responsibility  to  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce :  passed  the  Senate  but  did  not  become  law. 

1967-  72  :  Military  operational  programs  conducted  in  Vietnam. 
1968:  Public  Law  90-407  removed  the  NSF  mandate  as  lead  agency. 
1968  :  Detrimental  effects  of  acid  rain  reported  from  Sweden. 

1969:  Public  Law  91-190  (National  Environmental  Policy  Act)  required  im- 
pact statements. 

1970;  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology  Study  of  Critical  Environmental 
Problems  called  attention  to  inadvertent  effects  on  climate. 

1970  :  Stratospheric  contamination  by  SST's  suggested. 

1971 :  Departments  of  Commerce  and  Interior  carried  out  operational  programs 
in  Oklahoma  and  Florida. 

1971  :  Public  Law  92-205  required  filing  of  reports  of  non-Federal  weather 
modification  activities  with  the  Department  of  Commerce. 

1971  :  International  Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  Climate  raised  this  issue  to  inter- 
national level. 

1971 :  NAS/CAS  report  on  priorities  for  the  1970's  emphasized  need  for  atten- 
tion to  management  and  policy  problems  of  weather  modification. 

1971:  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology  approved  seven  national 
projects  under  various  lead  agencies. 

1971-72:  First  technological  assessments  of  weather  modification  projects  are 
favorable  to  operational  programs. 

1971-74  :  Climate  impact  assessment  program  ( CTAP)  of  Department  of  Trans- 
portation indicates  potentially  serious  consequences  of  large  SST  fleet  but  sug- 
gests ways  to  ameliorate  the  problem. 

1972:  Failure  of  Soviet  wheat  crop  and  drought  in  Sahel  emphasized  critical 
need  for  understanding  climate  and  the  value  of  effective  weather  modification. 

1973:  Weather  modification  budget  reduced  by  impoundment  from  $25.4  million 
to  $20.2  million. 

1973  :  Five  national  projects  deferred  or  terminated. 

1973:  NAS/CAS  report  on  weather  and  climate  modification  confirmed  earlier 
conclusions  and  recommended  lead  agency  status  for  NOAA. 


37 


1974  :  Stratospheric  contamination  by  freon  reported. 

1974 :  Domestic  Council  organized  panels  in  climate  change  and  weather 
modification. 

1974 :  General  Accounting  Office  report  on  weather  modification  criticized 
weather  modification  program  and  pointed  to  need  for  lead  agency. 

1974 :  Defense  Department  released  information  on  operations  in  Vietnam. 

1974 :  The  United  States  and  the  U.S.S.R.  agreed  to  a  joint  statement  intended 
"to  overcome  the  dangers  of  the  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  for 
military  purposes." 

1975 :  World  Meteorological  Organization  Executive  Committee  proposed  cumu- 
lus experiment  perhaps  in  Africa  or  Iran. 

1975 :  Department  of  Transportation  CIAP  report  indicated  that  a  fleet  of  500 
SST's  would  deplete  ozone  significantly,  but  suggested  that  cleaner  engines  could 
be  developed. 

1976:  Chinese  disapproval  resulted  in  abandoning  plans  for  Stormfury  in  the 
western  Pacific. 

1976 :  Hearings  held  on  three  weather  modification  bills  by  Senate  Commerce 
Committee. 

1976:  The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976  (Public  Law  94- 
859)  enacted  requiring  study  of  weather  modification. 

1977 :  Exceptionally  dry  winter  in  the  west  stimulates  State  operational  pro- 
grams intended  to  increase  mountain  snowpack. 

Since  the  completion  of  Fleagle's  list  above  in  March  1977,  at  least 
three  other  activities  of  equivalent  significance  ought  to  be  noted : 

1977  :  The  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board 
established  in  April  1977  and  initiated  a  major  study  on  a  recommended  national 
policy  and  Federal  program  of  research  in  weather  modification,  in  accordance 
with  requirements  to  be  fulfilled  by  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  under  Public  Law 
94-490,  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976. 

1977  :  The  United  Nations  General  Assembly  approved  a  treaty  banning  environ- 
mental modification  activities  for  hostile  purposes  on  May  18,  1977  ;  and  the  treaty 
opened  for  signature  by  the  member  nations. 

1978 :  The  Report  of  the  Commerce  Department's  Weather  Modification  Advi- 
sory Board  transmitted  through  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  the  Congress. 

The  history  of  the  modern  period  of  weather  modification  which 
follows  is  essentially  that  of  the  two  decades  following  the  monumental 
discoveries  of  1946.  An  excellent  account  of  the  history  of  weather 
modification,  which  emphasizes  this  period,  has  been  prepared  by 
Byers.51  This  work  has  been  very  helpful  in  some  of  the  material  to 
follow  and  is  referenced  frequently.  The  late  1960's  and  the  1970's  are 
so  recent  that  events  during  this  period  are  discussed  in  various  sections 
of  the  report  as  ongoing  activities  or  events  leading  to  current  activities 
in  weather  modification  research  programs,  operations,  and  policy 
decisions  rather  than  in  this  chapter  as  an  integral  part  of  an  updated 
history  of  the  subject. 

LAXGMUIR,   SCIIAEFER,   AND  VOXXEGUT 

The  modern  era  of  scientific  weather  modification  begaai  in  1946, 
when  a  group  of  scientists  at  the  General  Electric  Co.  demonstrated 
that,  through  "seeding,"  a  cloud  of  supercooled  water  droplets  could 
be  transformed  into  ice  crystals  and  precipitation  could  be  induced. 
These  were  not  traditional  meteorologists,  though  their  leader.  Dr. 
Irving  Langmuir,  was  a  famous  physicist  and  Nobel  laureate.  He  and 
his  assistant,  Vincent  J.  Schaefer,  had  been  working  for  3  years  on 
cloud  physics  research,  however,  in  which  they  were  studying  particle 
sizes,  precipitation  static,  and  icing.  Their  field  research  was  carried  on 


Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  pp.  3-44. 


38 


at  the  summit  of  Mt.  Washington.,  X.H..  where  they  observed  super- 
cooled clouds  which  often  turned  into  snowstorms.52 

In  an  attempt  to  simulate  field  conditions.  Schaefer  contrived  a 
laboratory  setup  using  a  home  freezer  lined  with  black  velvet,  with  a 
light  mounted  so  as  to  illuminate  ice  crystals  that  might  happen  to 
form  in  the  box.  Breathing  into  the  box,  whose  temperature  was  about 
—  23°  C,  produced  fog  but  no  ice  crystals,  even  when  various  sub- 
stances— including  sand,  volcanic  dust,  sulfur,  graphite,  talc,  and 
salt — were  dropped  in  as  possible  sublimation  nuclei.53  On  July  12. 
19-16,  Schaefer  wanted  to  lower  the  freezer  temperature  somewhat,  so 
he  inserted  a  large  piece  of  dry  ice.  and.  in  an  instant,  the  air  was 
full  of  millions  of  ice  crystals.  He  discovered  that  even  the  tiniest 
piece  of  dry  ice  produced  the  same  etfect.  In  fact,  dry  ice  had  no 
direct  effect  on  the  supercooled  cloud;  producing  an  air  temperature 
below  -  39°  C  was  critical.54 

In  his  paper  on  the  laboratory  experiments,  published  in  the  No- 
vember 15, 1946.  issues  of^Sciencev  Schaefer  stated  : 

It  is  planned  to  attempt  in  the  near  future  a  large-scale  conversion  of  super- 
cooled clouds  in  the  atmosphere  to  ice  crystal  clouds,  by  scattering  small  frag- 
ments of  dry  ice  into  the  cloud  from  a  plane.  It  is  believed  that  such  an  opera- 
tion is  practical  and  economically  feasible  and  that  extensive  cloud  systems  can 
be  modified  in  this  way.53 

Two  days  before  the  paper  appeared,  on  Xovember  13,  1946, 
Schaefer  made  his  historic  flight,  accomplishing  man's  first  scientific 
seeding  of  a  supercooled  cloud,  as  he  scattered  three  pounds  of  dry  ice 
along  a  3-mile  line  over  a  cloud  to  the  east  of  Schenectady,  X.Y.  At 
14.000  feet  the  cloud  temperature  was  —20°  C.  and  in  about  §  minutes 
after  seeding  the  entire  cloud  turned  into  snow,  which  fell  2,000  feet 
before  evaporating.56 

Dr.  Bernard  Vonnegut  had  also  worked  on  aircraft  icing  research 
and  in  1946  at  General  Electric  was  pursuing  a  variety  of  nueleation 
problems ;  but.  after  Schaefer's  laboratory  experiments,  he  again 
turned  his  attention  to  ice  nueleation  research.  He  discovered  that 
silver  iodide  and  lead  iodide  had  crystal  structures  close  to  that  of  ice 
and  were  also  insoluble  in  water,  and  after  repeated  initial  failures, 
owing  to  impurities  in  the  material,  Vonnegut  was  able  to  produce  ice 
crystals,  using  very  pure  silver  iodide  powder,  at  temperatures  only  a 
few  degrees  below  freezing.  Soon  means  were  developed  for  generating 
silver  iodide  smokes,  and  man's  first  successful  attempt  at  artificial 
nueleation  of  supercooled  clouds  was  accomplished.57 

Langmuir  explained  that  dry  ice  could  make  ice  crystals  form  by 
lowering  the  temperature  to  that  required  for  natural  nueleation  on 
whatever  might  be  present  as  nuclei,  or  even  in  the  absence  of  all 
nuclei;  however,  the  silver  iodide  provided  a  nucleus  that  was  much 
more  efficient  than  those  occurring  naturally.58 


"  Ibid.,  pp.  9-10. 

"  Halacy,  "The  Weather  Changers/'  ions.  pp.  S2-S3. 

«  langmuir.  Irvinp.  "The  Growth  of  Particles  in  Smoke,  and  Clouds  and  the  Production 
of  Snow  from  Supercooled  Clouds. Proceedings  of  the  American  Philosophical  Society,  vol. 
92,  no.  3,  July  1048,  p.  182.  '  ,  ,  _  , 

Schaefer,  Vincent  J..  "The  Production  of  Ice  Crystals  in  a  Cloud  of  Supercooled  Water 
Droplets.'-  Science,  vol.  U>4.  No.  2707.  Nov.  15.  1946,  p.  459. 

"  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1074.  p.  12. 

57  H>id  .  p.  13. 

M  Langmuir,  Irvine.  "Cloud  Seeding  by  Menus  of  Dry  Ice.  Silver  Iodide,  and  Sodium 
Chloride."  Transactions  of  the  New  York  Academy  of  Sciences,  ser.  II,  vol.  14.  November 
1951,  p.  40. 


39 


Following  Schaefer's  successful  flight  of  November  13,  1946,  and  in 
the  months  and  immediate  years  thereafter,  Langmuir  was  quoted  in 
the  popular  press  as  being  very  optimistic  in  his  predicted  benefits 
from  weather  modification.  In  a  1948  paper  he  said  that  k>*  *  *  it 
becomes  apparent  that  important  changes  in  the  whole  weather  map 
can  be  brought  about  by  events  which  are  not  at  present  being  con- 
sidered by  meteorologists."  59  His  publications  and  informal  statements 
of  this  character  touched  off  years  of  arguments  with  professional 
meteorologists,  by  whom  refutation  was  difficult  in  view  of  Langmuir s 
standing  in  the  scientific  community.  His  enthusiasm  for  discussing 
the  potential  extreme  effects  from  weather  control  was  unrestrained 
until  his  death  in  1957. 60 

RESEARCH  PROJECTS  SINCE   19  4  7 

Project  Cirrus 

Although  the  business  of  the  General  Electric  Co.  had  not  been  in 
meteorology,  it  supported  the  early  research  of  Langmuir  and  his 
associates  because  of  the  obvious  importance  of  their  discoveries. 
Realizing  that  weather  modification  research  was  more  properly  a  con- 
cern of  the  Federal  Government,  the  company  welcomed  the  interest 
of,  and  contract  support  from,  the  U.S.  Army  Signal  Corps  in 
February  1947.  Subsequently,  contract  support  was  augmented  by  the 
Office  of  Naval  Research,  the  U.S.  Air  Force  provided  flight  support, 
and  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau  participated  in  a  consultative  role.  The 
entire  program  which  followed,  through  1951,  under  this  arrangement, 
including  the  field  activities  by  Government  agencies  and  the  labora- 
tory work  and  general  guidance  by  General  Electric,  was  designated 
''Project  Cirrus."  61  According  to  Byers : 

The  most  pronounced  effect  produced  by  Project  Cirrus  and  subsequently  sub- 
stantiated by  a  number  of  tests  by  others,  was  the  clearing  of  paths  through 
supercooled  stratus  cloud  layers  by  means  of  seeding  from  an  airplane  with  dry 
ice  or  with  silver  iodide.  When  such  clouds  were  not  too  thick,  the  snow  that  was 
artificially  nucleated  swept  all  the  visible  particles  out  of  the  cloud.  *  *  *  In  one 
of  the  first  flights,  *  *  *  the  supercooled  particles  in  stratus  clouds  were  removed 
using  only  12  pounds  of  dry  ice  distributed  along  a  14-mile  line.  In  later  flights 
even  more  spectacular  results  were  achieved,  documented  by  good  photography. BL' 

Initial  Project  Cirrus  studies  were  made  during  the  summer  of 
1947  on  cumulus  clouds  near  Schenectady,  but  the  important  seeding 
experiments  were  conducted  the  following  year  in  New  Mexico.  Also 
during  1947,  there  was  an  attempt  on  October  13  to  modify  a  hurricane 
east  of  Jacksonville,  Fla.,  through  seeding  with  dry  ice.63  Visual  ob- 
servations, reported  by  flight  personnel,  seemed  to  indicate  a  pro- 
nounced change  in  the  cloud  deck  after  seeding,  and,  shortly  there- 
after, the  hurricane  changed  its  course  and  headed  directly  westward, 
striking  the  coasts  of  Georgia  and  South  Carolina.  Even  though  there 
was  precedent  for  such  erratic  behavior  of  hurricanes,  there  was 
speculation  about  the  effect  of  seeding  on  the  storm  path,  and  the  pos- 
sibility of  legal  responsibility  for  damages  which  might  be  caused  by 

59Lanfrmuir.  Irvinp.  "The  Production  of  Rain  by  a  Chain  Reaction  in  Cumulus  Clouds  at 
Temperatures  Above  Freezing."  Journal  of  Meteorology,  vol.  5.  No.  5.  October  1948.  p.  192. 
6°T?vprs.  "Historv  of  Weather  Modification."  1974.  pp.  13-14. 

61  ThH..  p.  14. 

62  Thirl. 

M  See  discussion  of  Project  Stormfury  in  ch.  5.  p.  290  ff. 


40 


such  experiments  in  the  future  provided  reason  to  avoid  seeding 
thereafter  any  storms  with  the  potential  of  reaching  land.  The  legal 
counsel  of  the  General  Electric  Co.  admonished  Langmuir  not  to 
relate  the  course  of  the  hurricane  to  the  seeding;  however,  throughout 
the  remainder  of  his  career  he  spoke  of  the  great  benefit  to  mankind  of 
weather  control  and  of  the  potential  ability  to  abolish  evil  effects  of 
hurricanes.  As  a  result,  it  was  expected  that  the  U.S.  Weather  Bu- 
reau would  undertake  massive  efforts  in  weather  control.  Meteorolo- 
gists within  and  without  of  the  Bureau  were  in  a  defensive  position, 
with  many  other  scientists,  impressed  by  Langmuirs  arguments,  op- 
posing their  position.  Thus  great  controversies  which  developed 
between  Langmuir  and  the  Weather  Bureau  and  much  of  the  meteoro- 
logical community  followed  these  and  other  claims,  and  often 
resulted  from  the  fact  that  Langmuir  did  not  seem  to  fully  comprehend 
the  magnitude  and  the  mechanisms  of  atmospheric  phenomena.04 

Langmuir  wanted  to  ^work  where  he  thought  storms  originated 
rather  than  in  upstate  New  York.  He  chose  Xew  Mexico  as  operations 
area  for  Project  Cirrus,  also  taking  advantage  of  the  opportunity  to 
collaborate  there  with  Dr.  E.  J.  Workman  at  the  New  Mexico  Institute 
of  Mining  and  Technology,  whose  thunderstorm  research  included 
radar  observations  and  laboratory  experiments  on  the  effects  of  ire 
on  storm  electrification.  After  cloud-seeding  flights  there  in  October 
1948,  Langmuir  reported  that,  as  a  result  of  the  seeding,  rainfall  had 
been  produced  over  an  area  greater  than  40,000  square  miles  (about 
one-fourth  the  area  of  the  State  of  New  Mexico) . 63 

The  Project  Cirrus  group  returned  to  Xew  Mexico  in  July  1040, 
and  10  additional  seeding  nights  were  conducted.  When  Langmuir 
learned  that  Vonnegut  was  dispensing  silver  iodide  from  a  ground 
generator  in  the  same  area  and  had,  in  fact,  also  been  doing  so  during 
the  flights  of  the  previous  October,  he  concluded  that  both  the  July 
1919  results  and  the  widespread  effects  of  October  1948  were  caused 
by  the  silver  iodide  rather  than  the  dry  ice  seeding  as  he  had  theorized 
previously.  Spectacular  results  continued  to  be  reported  by  him. 
spurred  on  by  meteorologists'  challenges  to  his  statistical  methods 
and  conclusions.  Noting  that  Vonnegut  had  operated  the  ground 
generator  only  on  certain  days,  Langmuir  observed  that  rainfall 
responses  corresponded  to  generator  "on"  times,  leading  him  to  his 
controversial  "periodic  seeding  experiment.''  to  which  the  remainder 
of  his  life  was  devoted.66 

In  the  periodic  seeding  experiment,  the  silver  iodide  generators  were 
operated  in  an  attempt  to  effect  a  7-day  periodicity  in  the  behavior  of 
various  weather  properties.  Langmuir  was  convinced  that  unusual 
weekly  weather  periodicities  in  early  1950  resulted  from  periodic  seed- 
ings  begun  in  Xew  Mexico  in  December  1949.  concluding  that  the  effects 
were  more  widespread  than  he  felt  earlier  and  that  temperatures  and 
pressures  thousands  of  miles  away  were  also  affected.  Meteorologists 
observed  that,  while  these  correlations  were  the  most  striking  seen,  yet 
such  periodicities  were  not  uncommon.67  The  Weather  Bureau  under- 
took a  study  of  records  from  1919  to  1951  to  see  if  such  weather  perio- 


"  Ibid.,  pp.  14-16. 
■  Ibid.,  p.  1«. 
w  Ibid.,  p  in. 
r~  Ibid.,  pp.  in  20. 


41 


dickies  had  occurred  in  the  past.  Glenn  W.  Brier,  author  of  the  report 
on  this  study,  indicated  that  a  T-day  component  in  the  harmonic  anal- 
ysis of  the  data  appeared  frequently,  though  seldom  as  marked  as  dur- 
ing the  periodic  seeding  experiment.68  Byers'  opinion  is  that  the  evi- 
dence appeared  just  as  reliable  for  occurrence  of  a  natural  periodicity 
as  for  one  controlled  artificially.  He  contends  that  the  most  important 
discoveries  in  cloud  physics  and  weather  modification  were  made  in  the 
General  Electric  Research  Laboratory  before  Project  Cirrus  was  orga- 
nized, that  the  effect  of  clearing  stratus  decks  was  shown  soon  after  the 
project  was  underway,  and  that  the  seeding  experiments  thereafter 
became  more  of  a  "program  of  advocacy  than  of  objective  proof."  The 
project  *  *  failed  to  demonstrate  that  seeding  of  cumulus  clouds 
increased  rainfall,  that  seeding  initiates  self -propagating  storms,  that 
the  atmosphere  responds  periodically  to  periodic  seeding,  or  that  a 
hurricane  could  be  deflected  in  its  path  by  seeding."  69 

Seeding  under  Project  Cirrus  ended  in  1951  and  the  final  report 
appeared  in  1953.  After  the  close  of  the  project,  Langmuir  continued 
his  analyses  and  wrote  two  more  papers  before  his  death  in  1957.  The 
final  paper  was  titled  "Freedom — the  Opportunity  To  Profit  From  the 
Unexpected."  a  report  that  Byers  feels  provided  a  fitting  philosophical 
close  to  his  career.70  The  Defense  Department  sponsored  another  series 
of  experiments,  called  the  Artificial  Cloud  Xucleation  Project,  from 
1051  to  1953. 

Tlie  Weather  Bureau  Cloud  Physics  project 

Amid  increasing  publicity  and  spectacular  claims  of  results  from 
cloud  seeding  in  Project  Cirrus,  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau  initiated  in 
1048  a  project  to  test  cloud  seeding,  with  the  cooperation  of  the  Na- 
tional Advisory  Committee  for  Aeronautics,  the  Navy,  and  the  Air 
Force.  The  Cloud  Phvsics  Project,  the  first  systematic  series  of  seeding 
experiments  in  stratiform  and  cumuliform  clouds,  continued  for  2 
years,  with  flight  operations  in  Ohio,  California,  and  the  Gulf  States. 
Findings  of  Project  Cirrus  were  substantiated  in  that  striking  visual 
cloud  modifications  occurred:  however,  there  was  no  evidence  to  show 
spectacular  precipitation  effects,  and  the  experiments  led  to  a  conserva- 
tive assessment  of  the  economic  importance  of  seeding.71  Cloud  dissi- 
pation rather  than  new  cloud  development  seemed  to  be  the  general 
result  from  seeding,  the  only  precipitation  extractable  from  clouds  was 
that  contained  in  the  clouds  themselves,  and  cloud  seeding  methods  did 
not  seem  to  be  promising  for  the  relief  of  drought.72 

Bosults  of  the  cloud  physics  experiment  had  almost  no  effect  on 
the  prevalent  enthusiasm  at  the  time  for  rainmaking  through  cloud 
soedino-,  oxcent  in  the  "hard  core"  of  the  meteorology  community.73 
As  r  result  of  thes<*  experiments  and  the  interpretation  of  the  results, 
the  TToather  Bureau  and  its  successor  organizations  in  the  Commerce 
Department,  the  Environmental  Science  Services  Administration  and 
the  "National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  have  been 


os  Brier.  Glenn  W..  "Seven-Dar  Periodicities  in  May  19.~2."  Bulletin  of  the  American 
Me^eorolosricPl  Societr.  vol.  35.  No.  3.  March  1954.  pp.  118-121. 
p?  B^ers.  "History  of  Weather  Modification."  1974.  pp.  20-21. 
70  Ibid.,  p.  20.. 

"  Flpfisrle.  Robert  G..  "Background  and  Present  Status  of  Weather  Modification."  196S. 
pp  0-10. 

■2  B-ers.  "^'storv  of  Weather  Modification."  1074.  pp.  10-17. 
»»  Ibid,,  p.  17. 


42 


regarded  by  some  critics  as  unimaginative  and  overconservative  on 
weather  modification.74 

The  U.S.  experiments  of  1953-54 

In  1951  the  Weather  Bureau,  the  Army,  the  Navy,  and  the  Air  Force 
appointed  an  advisory  group,  chaired  by  Dr.  Sverre  Petterssen  of 
the  University  of  Chicago,  under  whose  advice  and  guidance  the 
following  six  weather  modification  projects  were  initiated : 75 

1.  Seeding  of  extratropical  cyclones,  sponsored  by  the  Office  of 
Naval  Research  and  conducted  by  Xew  York  University. 

2.  Seeding  of  migratory  cloud  systems  associated  with  fronts  and 
cyclones,  conducted  by  the  Weather  Bureau. 

3.  Treatment  of  connective  clouds,  supported  by  the  Air  Force  and 
conducted  by  the  University  of  Chicago. 

4.  Research  on  the~dissipation  of  cold  stratus  and  fog,  conducted 
by  the  Army  Signal  Corps. 

5.  Studies  of  the  physics  of  ice  fogs,  sponsored  by  the  Air  Force 
and  conducted  by  the  Stanford  Research  Institute. 

6.  Investigation  of  a  special  warm  stratus  and  fog  treatment  svs- 
tem,  sponsored  by  the  Army  and  conducted  by  Arthur  D.  Little,  Inc. 

Field  experiments  on  these  projects  were  carried  out  in  1953  and 
1954,  and  reports  were  published  under  the  auspices  of  the  American 
Meteorological  Society  in  195T.76 

The  purpose  of  the  extratropical  cyclone  seeding  project,  called 
Project  Scud,  was  to  "*  *  *  ascertain  whether  or  not  it  would  be 
possible  to  modify  the  development  and  behavior  of  extratropical 
cyclones  by  artificial  nucleation.  *  *  *"  77  Analysis  obtained  in  Scud 
from  Florida  to  Long  Island  showed  that  "*  *  *  the  seeding  in  this 
experiment  failed  to  produce  any  effects  which  were  large  enough  to  be 
detected  against  the  background  of  natural  meteorological  variance."  7S 

The  Weather  Bureau  project  on  migratory  cloud  systems  was  con- 
ducted in  western  Washington  on  cloud  systems  that  enter  the  area 
from  the  Pacific  during  the  rainy  winter  months.  This  project  was 
criticized  by  commercial  seeders  since  it  was  conducted  in  the  West, 
which  was  considered  "their  territory,"  and  by  those  who  accused  the 
Weather  Bureau  of  seeking  a  negative  result  to  support  their  conserva- 
tive view  toward  weather  modification.  Byers  feels  that  there  was  an 
attempt  to  avoid  this  negative  impression  by  giving  a  more  positive 
interpretation  to  the  results  than  the  data  possibly  justified.79  In  sum- 
marizing results.  Hall  stated: 

Considering  the  results  as  a  whole  there  is  no  strong  evidence  to  support  a  con- 
clusion that  the  seeding  produced  measurable  changes  in  rainfall.  *  *  *  the  eval- 
uations do  not  necessarily  furnish  information  on  what  the  effect  might  have  been 
with  more  or  less  intense  seeding  activity,  rate  of  release  of  dry  ice,  etc.  Also  it 


71  Pleagle.  "Background  and  Present  Status  of  Weather  Modification.''  1998,  p  10» 

«  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1074.  p.  25. 

7.)  Prtterssen,  Sverre.  Jerome  Sp;ir.  Ferguson  Hall.  Roscoe  R.  Braham.  Jr.,  Louis  J.  Rat- 
tan. Horace  R.  Byers,  H.  J.  aufm  Kamoe.  J.  J.  Kelly,  and  H.  K.  Welcfcraann.  "Cloud  and 
Weather  Modification;  a  Croup  of  Field  Experiments."  Meteorological  Monographs,  vol.  2. 
No  11    American  Meteorological  Society,  Boston.  10."»7.  Ill  pp. 

"Petterssen,  Sverre.  "Reports  on  Experiments  with  Artificial  Cloud  Nucleation:  Intro- 
ductory Note."  In  Petterssen  et  al  .  "Cloud  and  Weather  Modification  :  ii  Croup  of  Field 

Experiments,"  Meteorological  Monographs,  vol.  2.  No.  n.  American  Meteoroio.^icnl  Society. 
Boston.  1957,  p,  S. 

T"  Spar.  Jerome  "Prolecl  Send."  in  Petterssen  et  al..  "Cloud  mid  Weather  Modification  ; 
:i  Group  of  Field  Experiments."  Meteorological  Monojrra plis.  vol.  2.  No.  11.  American  Mete- 
orological Society,  P.oston.  ior>7,  n  22. 

"Byers.  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1074.  p.  26. 


43 


might  be  speculated  that  the  seeding  increased  rainfall  on  some  occasions  and 
decreased  it  on  others.80 

The  aim  of  the  University  of  Chicago  Cloud  Physics  project  was  as 
follows : 81 

The  formulation  of  a  consistent  and  immediately  applicable  picture  of  the 
processes  of  formation  of  cumulus  clouds,  charged  centers,  and  precipitation  with 
a  view  toward  testing  the  possibility  that  one  can  modify  these  processes  and 
influence  the  natural  behavior  of  clouds. 

So  that  as  many  cumulus  clouds  as  possible  could  be  tested,  work  was 
conducted  in  the  Middle  West  in  the  summer  and  in  the  Caribbean  in 
the  winter,  realizing  that  the  warm  trade-wind  cumulus  clouds  in  the 
latter  region  might  be  amenable  to  seeding  with  large  hygroscopic 
nuclei  or  water  spray,  and  that  the  ice-crystal  process  would  operate  to 
initiate  precipitation  in  the  colder  clouds  of  the  Middle  West.82,  Of  the 
numerous  conclusions  from  this  project 83  a  few  will  serve  to  indicate 
the  value  of  the  project  to  the  understanding  of  cloud  phenomena  and 
weather  modification.  In  the  Caribbean  tests,  water  spray  from  an  air- 
craft was  seen  to  increase  rainfall  as  determined  by  radar  echoes ;  anal- 
ysis showed  that  the  treatment  doubled  the  probability  of  occurrence  of 
a  radar  echo  in  a  cloud.  From  tests  on  dry  ice  seeding  in  the  Middle 
West  it  was  found  that  in  the  majority  of  cases  treated  clouds  showed 
an  echo,  while  untreated  ones  did  not,  although  the  sample  was  consid- 
ered too  small  to  be  significant.  In  all  cases  clouds  were  considered  in 
pairs,  one  treated  by  seeding  and  the  other  untreated,  and  only  those 
clouds  showing  no  echo  initially  were  chosen  for  study.84 

The  seeding  experiments  with  supercooled  stratus  clouds  by  the 
Army  Signal  Corps  essentially  substantiated  the  results  of  Project 
Cirrus;  however,  from  these  carefully  conducted  tests  a  number  of 
new  relationships  w^ere  observed  with  regard  to  seeding  rates,  spread 
of  glaciating  effect,  cloud  thickness,  overseeding,  and  cloud  formation 
after  seeding.S5  The  report  on  this  project  carefully  summarized  these 
relationships  and  conclusions  for  both  dry  ice  and  silver  iodide 
seeding.86 

The  Air  Force  project  on  the  physics  of  ice  fogs,  conducted  by 
Stanford  Research  Institute,  was  intended  to  learn  the  relationship 
to  such  fogs  of  synoptic  situations,  local  sources  of  water,  and  pollu- 
tion. Investigations  in  Alaska  at  air  bases  showed  that  most  fogs 
developed  from  local  sources  of  water  and  pollution.  In  the  Arthur  L). 
Little  investigation  for  the  Army  attempts  were  made  to  construct 
generators  which  were  capable  of  producing  space  charges,  associated 
with  aerosols,  that  could  bring  about  precipitation  of  the  water  drop- 
lets in  warm  fogs  and  stratus.87 

»  Hail,  Ferguson.  "The  Weather  Bureau  ACN  Project."  In  Petterssen  et  al.,  "Cloud  and 
Weather  Modification  ;  a  Group  of  Field  Experiments,"  Meteorological  Monographs,  vol.  2. 
No.  11.  American  Meteorological  Society.  Boston.  1957.  pp.  45-46. 

slBraham.  Roscoe  R.,  Jr..  Louis  J.  Battan.  and  Horace  R.  Byers.  "Artificial  Nucleation 
of  Cumulus  Clouds."  In  Petterssen  et  al..  "Cloud  and  Weather  Modification  :  a  Group  of 
Field  Experiments,"  1957,  p.  47. 

&  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  pp.  26-27. 

83  Conclusions  are  precisely  spelled  out  in  somewhat  technical  terms  in  :  Braham,  Battan. 
and  Byers.  "Artificial  Nucleation  of  Cumulus  Clouds,"  1957,  pp.  S2-S3. 
fi  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  p.  27. 

86  IMd.  .    »  , 

86aufm  Kampe,  H.  J.,  J.  J.  Kelly,  and  H.  K.  Weickmann,  "Seeding  Experiments  m  Sub- 
cooled  Stratus  Clouds."  In  Petterssen  et  al..  "Cloud  and  Weather  Modification  :  a  Group  of 
Field  Experiments."  Meteorological  Monographs,  vol.  2,  No.  11.  American  Meteorological 
Society.  Boston,  1957,  p.  93.  ,        T  .     ,  . 

57  Petterssen,  "Reports  on  Experiments  With  Artificial  Cloud  Nucleation:  Introductory 
Note,"  1957,  p.  4. 


44 


Brers,  in  retrospect,  wonders  why  the  results  of  this  series  of  six 
experiments,  which  were  carefully  controlled  statistically,  did  not 
receive  more  attention  than  was  accorded  them.  He  attributes  some 
of  this  lack  of  visibility  to  the  publication  in  the  somewhat  obscure 
monograph  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  88  and  to  the  delay 
in  publishing  the  results,  since  the  Petterssen  committee  held  the  manu- 
scripts until  all  were  completed,  so  that  they  could  be  submitted  for 
publication  together.89 

Arizona  mountain  cumulus  experiments 

After  1954,  the  University  of  Chicago  group  joined  with  the  Insti- 
tute of  Atmospheric  Physics  at  the  University  of  Arizona  in  seeding 
tests  in  the  Santa  Catalina  Mountains  in  southern  Arizona.  These 
experiments  were  conducted  in  two  phases,  from  1957  through  1960 
and  from  1901  through  1964,  seeding  mostly  summer  cumulus  clouds, 
but  some  winter  storms,  with  silver  iodide  from  aircraft.  In  the  first 
phase,  analysis  of  precipitation  data  from  the  first  2  years  revealed 
more  rainfall  during  seeded  than  on  nonseeded  days ;  however,  during 
the  latter  2  years,  considerably  more  rainfall  was  achieved  on  non- 
seeded  days.  Combining  all  data  for  the  4  years  of  the  first  phase 
yielded  overall  results  with  more  rain  on  unseeded  days  than  on  seeded 
days;  hence,  the  experiments  were  modified  and  the  second  phase 
undertaken.  Of  the  3  years  in  the  second  phase,  only  one  showed  more 
rain  on  seeded  days  than  on  nonseeded  ones.  None  of  the  analyses 
attempted  could  support  the  hypothesis  that  airborne  silver  iodide 
seeding  increased  precipitation  or  influenced  its  area!  extent.  Byers 
suggests  that  the  failure  to  increase  rainfall  may  have  been  due  to  the 
fact  that  precipitation  initiation  resulted  from  the  coalescence  process 
rather  than  the  ice-crystal  process.90 

Project  Whitetop 

According  to  Byers,  perhaps  the  most  extensive  and  most  sophisti- 
cated weather  modification  experiment  (at  least  up  to  the  time  of 
Byers'  historical  review  in  1973)  was  a  5-year  program  of  summer 
convective  cloud  seeding  in  south-central  Missouri,  called  Project 
Whitetop.  Conducted  from  19G0  through  1964  by  a  group  from  the 
University  of  Chicago,  led  by  Dr.  Roscoe  11.  Braham,  the  purpose  of 
Whitetop  was  to  settle  with  finality  the  question  of  whether  or  not 
summer  convective  clouds  of  the  Midwest  could  be  seeded  with  silver 
iodide  to  enhance  or  initiate  precipitation.  Experimental  days  were 
divided  into  seeding  and  no  seeding  days,  chosen  randomly  from 
operational  days  suitable  for  seeding,  based  on  certain  moisture  cri- 
teria. Another  feature  of  the  project  was  the  attempt  to  determine  the 
extent  of  spreading  of  silver  iodide  smoke  plumes  from  the  seeding 
line.  Precipitation  effects  were  evaluated  by  radar  and  by  a  rain-gage 
network.01 

Final  analysis  of  all  of  the  Project  Whitetop  data  showed  that  the 
overall  effect  was  that,  in  the  presence  of  silver  iodide  nuclei,  the  rain- 
fall was  less  than  in  the  unseeded  areas.  Byers  attributes  these  negative 

88  Petterssen  et  al..  "Cloud  and  Weather  Modification;  a  Group  of  Field  Experiments," 
1957. 

*>  livers.  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  11)74,  p.  2S. 

»°  Il)ld.,  p.  29. 

«  Ibid.,  pp.  20-30. 


45 


results  to  the  physical  data  obtained  from  cloud-physics  aircraft.  "Most 
of  the  Missouri  clouds  produced  raindrops  by  the  coalescence  process 
below  the  freezing  line,  and  these  drops  were  carried  in  the  updrafts 
and  frozen  as  ice  pellets  at  surprisingly  high  subf reezing  temperatures 
(  —  5°  C  to  —10°  C)."  He  further  points  out  that  the  measured  con- 
centrations of  ice  particles,  for  the  range  of  sizes  present,  were  already 
in  the  natural  unseeded  conditions  equivalent  to  those  hoped  for  with 
seeding;  consequently,  the  silver  iodide  only  had  the  effect  of  over- 
seeding.92 

Climax  experiments 

Following  the  initial  General  Electric  experiments,  it  was  concluded 
by  Bergeron 93  that  the  best  possibility  for  causing  considerable  rain- 
fall increase  by  artifical  means  might  be  found  in  seeding  orographic  94 
cloud  systems.  Consequently,  there  were  almost  immediate  efforts  to 
increase  orographic  precipitation,  the  greatest  concentration  of  such 
work  being  in  the  Western  United  States.  Commercial  groups  such 
as  power  companies  and  irrigation  concerns  took  the  early  initiative  in 
attempts  to  augment  snowfall  from  orographic  cloud  systems  in  order 
to  increase  streamflow  from  the  subsequent  snowmelt. 

Colorado  State  University  (CSU)  began  a  randomized  seeding 
experiment  in  the  high  Rocky  Mountains  of  Colorado  in  1960,  under 
the  direction  of  Lewis  O.  Grant,  to  investigate  snow  augmentation 
from  orographic  clouds.  The  project  was  designed  specifically  to 
(1)  evaluate  the  potential,  (2)  define  seedability  criteria,  and  (3)  de- 
velop a  technology  for  seeding  orographic  clouds  in  central  Colorado.95 
It  followed  the  1957  report  of  the  President's  Advisory  Committee  for 
Weather  Control,  in  which  it  had  been  concluded  that  seeding  of  oro- 
graphic clouds  could  increase  precipitation  by  10  to  15  percent,  basing 
this  judgment,  however,  on  data  from  a  large  number  of  seeding  pro- 
grams that  had  not  been  conducted  on  a  random  basis.96 

The  first  group  of  the  CSU  seeding  experiments  took  place  from 
1960  to  1965  in  the  vicinity  of  Climax,  Colo.,  and  has  been  designated 
Climax  I.  A  second  set  of  tests  in  the  same  area  from  1965  to  1970 
has  been  referred  to  as  Climax  II.  The  Climax  experiments  are  impor- 
tant in  the  history  of  weather  modification  because  they  were  the  first 
intensive  projects  of  their  kind  and  also  because  positive  results 
were  reported.97  The  precipitation  for  all  seeded  cases  was  greater  than 
for  all  of  the  unseeded  cases  by  9,  13,  and  39  percent,  respectively,  for 
Climax  I,  Climax  II,  and  Climax  IIB.  The  latter  set  of  data  are  a 
subsample  of  those  from  Climax  II,  from  which  possibly  contaminated 
cases  due  to  upwind  seeding  by  other  groups  were  eliminated.98 

Ibid.,  p.  30. 

93  Bergeron,  Tor,  "The  Problem  of  an  Artificial  Control  of  Rainfall  on  the  Globe ;  General 
Effects  of  Ice  Nuclei  in  Clouds."  Tellus,  vol.  1,  No.  1,  February  1949,  p.  42. 

94  A  definition  of  orographic  clouds,  a  discussion  of  their  formation,  and  a  summary  of 
attempts  to  modify  them  are  found  in  ch.  3,  p.  71  ff. 

95  Grant,  Lewis  O.,  and  Archie  M.  Kahan,  "Weather  Modification  for  Augmenting  Oro- 
graphic Precipitation."  In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (editor),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification," 
New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  p.  295. 

98  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control.  Final  Report  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Weather  Control,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Dec.  31,  1957,  vol.  I, 
p.  vi.  (The  establishment  of  the  Advisory  Committee  and  its  activities  leading  to  publica- 
tion of  its  final  report  are  discussed  in  ch.  5,  under  activities  of  the  Congress  and  of  the 
executive  branch  of  the  Federal  Government,  see  pp.  195.  214,  and  236.) 

97  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  pp.  30-31.  „ 

98  Grant  and  Kahan,  "Weather  Modification  for  Augmenting  Orographic  Precipitation, 
1974,  p.  298. 


46 


Lightning  suppression  experiments 

From  1947  until  the  close  of  Project  Cirrus,  interspersed  with  his 
other  activities,  Vincent  Schaefer  visited  U.S.  Forest  Service  instal- 
lations in  the  northern  Rockies  in  order  to  assist  in  attempts  to  sup- 
press lightning  by  cloud  seeding.  As  early  as  1949  an  attempt  was 
made  to  seed  thunderstorm  clouds  with  dry  ice,  dumping  it  from  the 
open  door  of  a  twin-engine  aircraft  flying  at  25,000  feet."  This 
stimulated  curiosity  among  those  involved,  but  also  showed  that  light- 
ning-prevention research  wTould  require  a  long  and  carefully  planned 
effort.  These  early  activities  led  to  the  formal  establishment  of  Proj- 
ect Skyfire  in  1953,  aimed  at  lightning  suppression,  as  part  of  the 
overall  research  program  of  the  Forest  Service.  Throughout  the  his- 
tory of  the  project,  research  benefited  from  the  cooperation  and  sup- 
port of  many  agencies  "and  scientific  groups,  including  the  National 
Science  Foundation,  the  Weather  Bureau,  Munitalp  Foundation,  the 
Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  the  National  Park  Service, 
General  Electric  Research  Laboratories,  Meteorology,  Inc.,  and  sev- 
eral universities.  The  project  was  phased  out  by  the  Forest  Service 
in  the  1970's,  since  results  of  years  of  tests  were  inconclusive,  although 
there  had  been  some  reports  of  success.  Skyfire  was  the  longest  con- 
tinuing Federal  weather  modification  research  project,  enduring  for 
about  20  years.1 

Fog  dispersal  research 

Experiments  were  conducted  on  clearing  supercooled  fog  from  run- 
ways at  Orly  Airport  in  Paris  since  1962,  using  sprays  of  liquid  pro- 
pane. Soon  after  these  successful  tests,  the  method  became  operational 
and  has  already  succeeded  in  various  U.S.  Air  Force  installations.  The 
dissipation  of  cold  fog  is  now  operational  also  at  many  locations, 
including  some  in  North  America  and  in  the  Soviet  Union.  Warm  fogs, 
however,  are  more  common  over  the  inhabited  globe,  and  efforts  to 
dissipate  them  had  not  advanced  very  far,  even  by  1970.2 

Hurricane  modification 

In  an  earlier  discussion  of  the  work  of  Langmuir  and  his  associates 
under  Project  Cirrus,  an  attempt  at  hurricane  modification  was  men- 
tioned.3 The  historical  unfolding  of  hurricane  research  in  the  United 
States  thereafter  will  not  be  reported  here  since  it  is  discussed  in  detail 
in  chapter  5,  under  Project  Stormfury,  now  a  major  weather  modifica- 
tion research  program  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Ad- 
ministration of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.4 

Hail  suppression 

The  principal  lead  in  research  to  suppress  hail  during  the  1950's  and 
1960's  was  not  in  the  United  States,  but  mainly  elsewhere,  particularly 
in  Switzerland,  France,  Italy,  tho  U.S.S.R.,  Argentina,  Bulgaria, 
Yugoslavia,  Kenya,  and  Canada.  Hail  suppression  is  based  on  the 

86  Barrows  J  S.  "Preventing  Fire  from  the  Sky."  In  U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture, 
"The  Yearbook  of  Agriculture,  1968:  Science  for  Better  Living."  Washington.  D.C.,  U.S. 
Government  Printing  Office,  1968,  p.  219. 

1  For  a  more  detailed  discussion  of  Project  Skyfire,  see  p.  309,  under  the  weather  modi- 
fication program  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  in  ch.  r>. 

2  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  p.  33. 

3  See  p.  39. 

*  See  p.  296. 


47 


hypothesis  that,  if  a  cloud  is  supplied  with  a  superabundance  of  ice 
nuclei,  the  available  water  will  be  used  to  form  a  great  number  of  snow 
crystals,  thus  depriving  the  hailstones  of  sufficient  water  to  grow 
to  damaging  size.  Most  of  the  early  foreign  attempts  to  suppress  hail 
using  explosive  rockets  or  ground-based  silver  iodide  generators 
proved  disappointing.5 

In  the  Soviet  Union,  the  Caucasus  hail  suppression  experiments  of 
the  mid-1960's  were  of  great  interest  to  cloud  physicists.  Using  radar 
to  locate  the  zone  of  greatest  water  content  in  convective  clouds  and 
rockets  with  explosive  warheads  to  deliver  lead  iodide  with  precision 
into  this  zone,  the  Russians  claimed  success  in  suppressing  hailstorms, 
based  on  statistical  reduction  in  crop  damages.  Operational  hail  sup- 
pression activity  is  now  conducted  on  a  large  scale  in  the  Soviet 
Union.6- 7  Most  hail  suppression  efforts  in  the  United  States  in  the 
1960's  were  commercial  operations  which  did  not  produce  data  of  any 
significant  value  for  further  analysis. 

Foreign  weather  modification  research 

While  the  Russians  and  some  other  countries  have  concentrated  on 
hail  suppression  research,  Australia,  like  the  United  States,  has  been 
principally  concerned  with  augmenting  precipitation.  Very  shortly 
after  Schaefer  first  seeded  a  natural  cloud  with  dry  ice,  Krauss  and 
Squires  of  the  Australian  Weather  Bureau  seeded  stratonimbus  clouds 
in  February  1947  near  Sidney.  The  Commonwealth  Scientific  and 
Industrial  Research  Organization  (CSIRO)  subsequently  organized, 
under  Dr.  E.  G.  Bowen,  what  might  then  have  been  the  world's  out- 
standing group  of  cloud  physics  and  weather  modification  scientists. 
Byers  feels  that  probably  "*  *  *  no  other  group  contributed  more  to 
practical  cloud  physics  during  the  period  approximately  from  1950  to 
1965."  8 

The  Snowy  Mountain  project  in  Australia,  whose  object  was  to  pro- 
duce a  significant  precipitation  increase  over  the  mountains  by  silver 
iodide  seeding,  has  attracted  most  attention.  For  a  5-year  period  from 
1955  through  1959,  this  experiment  was  conducted  during  the  colder 
part  of  the  Southern  Hemisphere  year,  using  silver  iodide  dispensed 
from  aircraft.  Although  initial  experimental  reports  indicated  suc- 
cessful increases  in  precipitation  over  the  target,  the  final  1963  re- 
port after  complete  analysis  stated  that  results  were  encouraging  but 
inconclusive.9 

Interesting  experiments  were  carried  out  in  Israel  during  the  1960's, 
using  airborne  silver  iodide  seeding  of  mostly  cumulus  clouds.  Statis- 
tical analysis  of  data  from  the  first  5%  years  of  tests  revealed  an  in- 
crease of  18  percent  in  rainfall.10 

A  project  called  Gross versuch  III  was  conducted  on  the  southern 
slopes  of  the  Alps  in  Switzerland.  Although  initiated  as  a  randomized 
hail  suppression  experiment,  using  ground-based  silver  iodide  gen- 
erators, the  analysis  indicated  that  hail  frequency  was  greater  on 


5  Byers,  "Histry  of  Weather  Modification,"  pp.  31-32. 

6  Ibid.,  p.  32. 

7  The  hail  suppression  efforts  of  the  U.S.S.R.  are  discussed  in  more  detail  under  the  status 
of  hail  suppression  technology  in  ch.  3,  p.  88,  and  under  foreign  programs  in  ch.  9,  412. 

8  Byers,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  1974,  p.  23. 

9  Ibid.,  pp.  23-24. 
"  Ibid.,  p.  31. 


48 


seeded  than  on  nonseeded  days,  but  that  the  average  rainfall  on  seeded 
days  was  21  percent  greater  than  on  nonseeded  days.11 

COMMERCIAL  OPERATIONS 

In  the  weeks  and  months  following  Schaefer's  first  cloud  seeding 
experiment  public  interest  grew,  and  Langmuir  and  Schaefer  spoke 
before  and  consulted  with  groups  of  water  users,  farmers  and  ranchers, 
city  officials,  Federal  program  directors,  and  scientific  societies.  As  a 
result  there  was  a  burgeoning  of  new  cloud-seeding  efforts  initiated  by 
commercial  operators,  industrial  organizations,  water  districts,  and 
groups  of  farmers.  Some  used  ground  generators  for  dispensing  silver 
iodide  obviating  the  need  for  airplanes  and  their  attendant  high  costs, 
so  that  many  such  opepations  became  quite  profitable.  Many  rain- 
makers were  incompetent  and  some  were  unscrupulous,  but  their  activi- 
ties flourished  for  a  while,  as  the  experiments  of  Shaefer  and  Lang- 
muir were  poorly  imitated.  Some  of  the  more  reliable  companies  are 
still  in  business  today,  and  their  operations  have  provided  data  valu- 
able to  the  development  of  weather  modification  technology.12 

Byers  relates  a  few  instances  of  early  commercial  operations  of 
particular  interest.13  In  1949-50  the  city  of  New  York  hired  Dr.  Wal- 
lace E.  Howell,  a  former  associate  of  Langmuir,  to  augment  its  water 
supply  by  cloud  seeding.  New  York's  citizenry  became  interested  and 
involved  in  discussions  over  Howell's  activities  as  the  news  media  made 
them  known.  This  project  was  also  the  first  case  where  legal  action  was 
taken  against  cloud  seeding  by  persons  whose  businesses  could  be 
adversely  affected  by  the  increased  rain.  Although  rains  did  come  and 
the  city  reservoirs  were  filled,  Howell  could  not  prove  that  he  was  re- 
sponsible for  ending  the  drought.14  Howell  subsequently  seeded  in 
Quebec  in  August  1953  in  an  attempt  to  put  out  a  forest  fire  and  in 
Cuba  to  increase  rainfall  for  a  sugar  plantation  owner.15 

The  Santa  Barbara  project  in  California,  also  a  commercial  opera- 
tion designed  to  increase  water  supply,  received  a  great  deal  of  atten- 
tion. In  this  period  water  was  increased  through  augmenting  rain  and 
snow  in  the  mountains  north  and  northeast  of  the  city.  The  project 
was  evaluated  by  the  California  State  Water  Resources  Board  and 
was  unique  among  commercial  contract  operations,  inasmuch  as  the 
clients  permitted  randomization  (that  is,  random  selection  of  only 
some  storms  for  seeding)  in  order  to  allow  adequate  evaluation.16 

In  the  West  the  earliest  commercial  operations  were  developed 
under  Dr.  Irving  P.  Krick,  formerly  head  of  the  Department  of  Mete- 
orology at  the  California  Institute  of  Technology.  Asked  to  monitor 
aerial  dry  ice  seeding  over  Mt.  San  Jacinto  in  1947,  Krick  became 
interested  in  weather  modification,  left  Caltech,  and  formed  his  own 
company.  Seeding  projects  were  carried  out  during  1948  and  1949  for 
ranchers  in  San  Diego  County,  Calif.,  in  Mexico,  and  in  Arizona.  In 
1050  lie  moved  to  Denver  and  formed  a  new  company,  which  began 
seeding  activity  over  the  Great  Plains,  elsewhere  in  the  West,  and  in 


"  Ibid. 

12  Ibid.,  pp.  17,  21.  22. 
"  Ibid.,  pp.  22-23. 
w  Ibid.,  p.  22. 

15  Hnlacv.  "The  Weather  Chancers, "  1968,  pp.  96-97. 
"Ibid.,  pp.  22-23. 


49 


other  countries.  A  number  of  former  students  of  Krick  joined  him  or 
formed  other  cloud  seeding  companies,  mostly  in  the  West  during  the 
1950's.17  By  1953  Krick  had  operated  150  projects  in  18  States  and  6 
foreign  countries  and  amassed  over  200,000  hours  of  seeding  time.  For 
three  winters — 1949,  1950,  and  1951 — his  company  claimed  that  they 
had  increased  the  snowpack  in  the  Rockies  around  Denver  from  175  to 
288  percent  over  the  average  of  the  previous  10  years.  After  6  months 
of  seeding  in  Texas  in  1953,  the  water  in  a  drainage  basin  near  Dallas 
had  increased  to  363  percent  of  the  January  1  level,  while  in  nearby 
nonseeded  basins  water  ranged  from  a  22-percent  deficit  to  an  increase 
of  19  percent.18 

At  the  start  of  extensive  seeding  in  the  early  1950's  there  was  a  sharp 
increase  in  commercial  operations,  accompanied  by  great  publicity  as 
drought  began  in  the  Great  Plains.  During  the  middle  and  latter  1950's, 
however,  seeding  diminished  as  did  the  drought.  The  some  30  annual 
seeding  projects  in  the  United  States  during  the  mid  and  latter  1950's 
and  the  1960's  (excluding  fog  clearing  projects)  were  conducted  for 
the  most  part  by  about  five  firms,  on  whose  staffs  there  were  skilled 
meteorologists,  cloud  physicists,  and  engineers  for  installing  and  main- 
taining ground  and  air  systems.  Most  of  these  projects  were  in  the 
categories  of  enhancing  rain  or  snowfall,  with  a  distribution  in  a 
typical  year  as  follows :  About  a  dozen  in  the  west  coast  States,  half 
a  dozen  in  the  Rocky  Mountains-Great  Basin  area,  half  a  dozen  in 
the  Great  Plains,  and  the  remainder  in  the  rest  of  the  United  States. 
Of  the  projects  in  the  West,  six  to  nine  have  been  watershed  projects 
sponsored  by  utility  companies.  Most  of  these  projects  endured  for 
long  periods  of  years  and  many  are  still  underway.19 

Fleagle  notes  that  by  the  early  1950's,  10  percent  of  the  land  area 
of  the  United  States  was  under  commercial  seeding  operations  and 
$3  million  to  $5  million  was  being  expended  annually  by  ranchers, 
towns,  orchardists,  public  utilities,  and  resort  operators.  The  extent 
of  such  commercial  operations  receded  sharply,  and  by  the  late  1950's 
business  was  only  about  one-tenth  or  less  than  it  had  been  a  decade 
earlier.  As  noted  above,  public  utilities  were  among  those  who  con- 
tinued to  sponsor  projects  throughout  this  period.20 

Figure  1  shows  the  purposes  of  weather  modification  operations  for 
various  sections  of  the  United  States  for  the  period  July  1950  through 
June  1956.  For  each  geographical  section  the  column  graphs  represent 
the  percentage  of  the  total  U.S.  seeding  for  each  of  five  purposes  that 
was  performed  in  that  section.  The  bar  graph  in  the  inset  shows  the 
percentage  of  total  U.S.  cloud-seeding  effort  that  is  undertaken  for 
each  of  these  five  purposes.  Figure  2  shows  the  total  area  coverage 
and  the  percent  of  U.S.  territory  covered  by  cloud  seeding  for  each 
year  from  July  1950  through  June  1956.  Both  figures  are  from  the 
final  report  of  the  President's  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather 
Control.21 


17  Elliott,  Robert  D.,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  1974,  p.  47. 

18  Halacy,  "The  Weather  Changers,"  1968,  p.  96. 

19  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  1974,  p.  46-48. 

20  Fleagle,  "Background  and  Present  Status  of  Weather  Modification."  1968,  p.  11. 

21  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  Final  Report,  1958,  vol.  II.  Figures  lacing 
p.  242  and  243. 


Figure  1 — Purposes  of  weather  modification  operations  conducted  in  various 
geographical  sections  of  the  United  States,  July  1950  through  June  1956.  (From 
Final  Report  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  1958.) 


51 

CLOOP  SiiPiHG  IN  THE  UHITBP  STATES 


-15% 


1950-  1951-  1952-  1953-  (954-  1935- 

1951  1952  1953  1954  1955  1936 


Figure  2. — Total  area  coverage  and  percent  of  area  coverage  for  the  48  cotermi- 
'  nous  States  of  the  United  States  by  weather  modification  operations  for  each 

year,  July  1950  through  June  1956.  (From  Final  Report  of  the  Advisory 

Committee  on  Weather  Control,  1958.) 

Table  1  is  a  summary  of  weather  modification  operations  for  fiscal 
years  1966,  1967,  and  1968,  compiled  by  the  National  Science  Founda- 
tion from  field  operators'  reports  which  the  Foundation  required  to  be 
filed.  Figure  3  shows  the  locations  in  the  continental  United  States  for 
both  operational  and  research  weather  modification  projects  during 
fiscal  year  1968.  In  September  1968,  as  provided  by  Public  Law  90-407, 
the  National  Science  Foundation  was  no  longer  authorized  to  require 
the  submission  of  reports  on  operational  weather  modification  proj- 
ects.22 Weather  modification  activities  are  now  reported  to  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce,  under  provisions  of  Public  Law  92-205,  and  sum- 
mary reports  of  these  activities  are  published  from  time  to  time.23 


22  See  discussions  of  this  law  and  of  the  activities  of  the  National  Science  Foundation  as 
lead  weather  modification  acency  through  September  1968.  pp  196  and  215  in  ch.  5. 

23  See  discussions  of  Public  Law  92-205  and  of  the  weather  modification  activities  report- 
ing program  in  ch.  5,  197  and  232.  The  activities  summarized  in  the  latest  available 
Department  of  Commerce  report  are  discussed  in  ch.  7  and  listed  in  app.  G. 


52 


TABLE  1.— SUMMARY  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  FROM  FIELD  OPERATORS'  REPORTS,  FISCAL  YEARS 
1966,  1967,  AND  1968  i  (FROM  NSF  TENTH  ANNUAL  REPORT  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION,  1968) 


Area  treated  Number  of  Number  of  Number  of 

(square  miles)  projects  States2  operators2 


Purpose  1966       1967      1968   1966   1967   1968  1966   1967   1968  1966   1967  1968 


Rain  augmentation  and  snow- 
pack  increase   61,429  62,021  53,369  35  41  37  21  20  21  22  25  23 

Hail  suppression   20,566  20,556  13,510  3  4  4  3  3  5  3  4  4 

Fog  dissipation   100  118  145  22  15  15  15  13  9  17  15  10 

Cloud  modification   19,345  28,300  18,600  9  18  8  8  12  7  8  14  6 

Lightning  suppression   314  314  314  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1 


Totals...   101,744   111,383  85,938      70      79      65      30      23      25      46      44  37 


1  Data  for  fiscal  year  1968  include  reports  received  to  Sept.  1, 1968. 

2  Totals  are  not  the  sum  of  the  items  since  many  States  and  operators  are  involved  in  more  than  one  type  of  activity. 

An  early  commercial  hail  suppression  project  was  begun  in  Colorado 
in  1958.  Eventually  it  involved  5  seeding  aircraft  and  about  125 
ground-based  generators  "making  it  the  largest  single  cloud-seeding 
project  up  to  that  time.  Results  of  the  project  were  examined  at  Colo- 
rado State  University  and  presented  at  the  International  Hail  Con- 
ference in  Verona,  Italy,  in  1960.  This  project  stimulated  the  interest 
of  scientists  and  provided  historical  roots  for  what  later  was  estab- 
lished as  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  in  the  same  area  over 
a  decade  later  by  the  National  Science  Foundation.2'4' 25 

During  the  1960's,  clearing  of  cold  airport  fog  through  cloud  seed- 
ing became  an  operational  procedure.  Since  the  techniques  used  can 
only  be  applied  to  cold  fog,  they  were  used  at  the  more  northerly 
or  high-altitude  airports  of  the  United  States,  where  about  15  such 
projects  were  conducted,  and  are  still  underway,  each  winter.2,6 


2*  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  1974,  p.  48. 

23  The  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  is  discussed  in  detail  under  the  weather  modi- 
fier lion  program  ol"  the  Xationa'  Science  Foundation  in  ch.  5  ;  se  p.  274ff. 
28  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  1974.  pp.  48-49. 


53 


Figure  3. — Weather  modification  projects  in  the  United  States  during  fiscal  year 
1968.  (From  NSF  Tenth  Annual  Report  on  weather  modification,  1968.) 


HISTORY    OF    FEDERAL    ACTIVITIES,    COMMITTEES,    POLICY    STUDIES,  AND 

REPORTS 

In  the  various  discussions  under  activities  of  the  Congress  and  the 
executive  branch  of  the  Federal  Government  in  chapter  5,  there  are 
historical  accounts  of  legislative  actions  pertinent  to  weather  modifica- 
tion, of  the  establishment  and  functioning  of  special  committees  in 
accordance  with  public  laws  or  as  directed  by  the  executive  agencies, 
and  of  the  policy  and  planning  studies  and  reports  produced  by  the 
special  committees  or  by  the  agencies.  Inclusion  of  a  separate  historical 
account  of  these  Federal  activities  at  this  point  would  be  largely  repeti- 
tive, and  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  various  sections  of  chapter  5,  in 
which  historical  developments  of  various  Federal  activities  are  un- 
folded as  part  of  the  discussions  of  those  activities. 


I 


CHAPTER  3 


TECHNOLOGY  OF  PLANNED  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

Although  the  theoretical  basis  for  weather  modification  was  laid  to 
a  large  extent  during  the  1930's,  the  laboratory  and  field  experiments 
which  ushered  in  the  "modern  era"  occurred  in  1946  and  in  the  years 
immediately  thereafter.  By  1950,  commercial  cloud  seeding  had  become 
widespread,  covering  an  estimated  total  U.S.  land  area  of  about  10  per- 
cent.1 By  the  mid-1950's,  however,  it  was  apparent  that  the  funda- 
mental atmospheric  processes  which  come  into  play  in  weather 
modification  are  very  complex  and  were  far  from  being  understood.  A 
period  of  retrenchment  and  reevaluation  began,  the  number  of  com- 
mercial operators  had  decreased  dramatically,  and  weather  modifica- 
tion had  fallen  into  some  disrepute  among  many  meteorologists  and 
much  of  the  public.  A  period  of  carefully  designed  experiments  was 
initiated  about  two  decades  ago,  supported  by  increased  cloud  physics 
research  and  increasingly  more  sophisticated  mathematical  models  and 
statistical  evaluation  schemes. 

Meanwhile,  a  small  group  of  commercial  operators,  generally  more 
reliable  and  more  responsible  than  the  typical  cloud  seeder  of  the  1950 
era,  has  continued  to  provide  operational  weather  modification  services 
to  both  public  and  private  sponsors.  These  operators  have  attempted  to 
integrate  useful  research  results  into  their  techniques  and  have  pro- 
vided a  bank  of  operational  data  useful  to  the  research  community. 
The  operational  and  research  projects  have  continued  over  the  past  two 
decades,  often  in  a  spirit  of  cooperation,  not  always  characteristic  of 
the  attitudes  of  scientists  and  private  operators  in  earlier  years.  Often 
the  commercial  cloud  seeders  have  contracted  for  important  roles  in 
major  field  experiments,  where  their  unique  experiences  have  been 
valuable  assets. 

Through  the  operational  experiences  and  research  activities  of  the 
past  30  years,  a  kind  of  weather  modification  technology  has  been 
emerging.  Actually,  though  some  practices  are  based  on  common  theory 
and  constitute  the  basic  techniques  for  meeting  a  number  of  seeding 
objectives,  there  are  really  a  series  of  weather  modification  technol- 
ogies, each  tailored  to  altering  a  particular  atmospheric  phenomenon 
and  each  having  reached  a  different  state  of  development  and  opera- 
tional usefulness.  At  one  end  of  this  spectrum  is  cold  fog  clearing,  con- 
sidered to  be  operational  now,  while  the  abatement  of  severe  storms,  at 

1  Fleagle.  Robert  G.,  "Background  and  Present  Status  of  Weather  Modification."  In 
"Weather  Modification  :  Science  and  Public  Policy,"  Seattle,  University  of  Washington 
Press,  1968,  p.  11. 


(55) 


56 


the  other  extreme,  remains  in  the  initial  research  phase.  Progress  to 
date  in  development  of  these  technologies  has  not  been  nearly  so  much 
a  function  of  research  effort  expended  as  it  has  depended  on  the  funda- 
mental atmospheric  processes  and  the  ease  by  which  they  can  be  altered. 
There  is  obvious  need  for  further  research  and  development  to  refine 
techniques  in  those  areas  where  there  has  been  some  success  and  to 
advance  technology  were  progress  has  been  slow  or  at  a  virtual 
standstill. 

ASSESSMENT  OF  THE  STATUS  OF  WFjATHER  MODIFICATION  TECHNOLOGY 

Recently,  the  following  summary  of  the  current  status  of  weather 
modification  technology  was  prepared  by  the  Weather  Modification 
Advisory  Board : 

1.  The  only  routine  operational  projects  are  for  clearing  cold  fog. 
Research  on  warm  fog  has  yielded  some  useful  knowledge  and  good 
models,  but  the  resulting  technologies  are  so  costly  that  they  are  usable 
mainly  for  military  purposes  and  very  busy  airports. 

2.  Several  long-running  efforts  to  increase  winter  snowpack  by 
seeding  clouds  in  the  mountains  suggest  that  precipitation  can  be 
increased  by  some  15  percent  over  what  would  have  happened 
"naturally." 

3.  A  decade  and  a  half  of  experience  with  seeding  winter  clouds  on 
the  U.S.  west  coast  and  in  Israel,  and  summer  clouds  in  Florida,  also 
suggest  a  10-  to  15-percent  increase  over  "natural''  rainfall.  Hypotheses 
and  techniques  from  the  work  in  one  area  are  not  directly  transferable 
to  other  areas,  but  will  be  helpful  in  designing  comparable  experiments 
with  broadly  similar  cloud  systems. 

4.  Xumerous  efforts  to  increase  rain  by  seeding  summer  clouds  in  the 
central  and  western  parts  of  the  United  States  have  left  many  ques- 
tions unanswered.  A  major  experiment  to  try  to  answer  them — for  the 
High  Plains  area — is  now  in  its  early  stages. 

5.  It  is  scientifically  possible  to  open  holes  in  wintertime  cloud  layers 
by  seeding  them.  Increasing  sunshine  and  decreasing  energy  con- 
sumption may  be  especially  relevant  to  the  northeastern  quadrant  of 
the  United  States. 

6.  Some  $10  million  is  spent  by  private  and  local  public  sponsors  for 
cloud-seeding  efforts,  but  these  projects  are  not  designed  as  scientific 
experiments  and  it  is  difficult  to  say  for  sure  that  operational  cloud 
seeding  causes  the  claimed  results. 

7.  Knowledge  about  hurricanes  is  improving  with  good  models  of 
their  behavior.  But  the  experience  in  modifying  that  behavior  is  primi- 
tive so  far.  It  is  inherently  difficult  to  find  enough  test  cases,  especially 
since  experimentation  on  tvphoons  in  the  "Western  Pacific  has  been 
blocked  for  the  time  being  by  international  political  objections. 

8.  Although  the  Soviets  and  some  U.S.  private  oi>erators  claim  some 
success  in  suppressing  hail  by  seeding  clouds,  our  understanding  of  the 
physical  processes  that  create  hail  is  still  weak.  The  one  major  U.S. 
field  experiment  increased  our  understanding  of  severe  storms,  but 
otherwise  proved  mostlv  the  dimensions  of  what  we  do  not  vet  know. 

0.  There  have  been  many  efforts  to  suppress  lightning  by  seeding 
thunderstorms.  Our  knowledge  of  the  processes  involved  is  fair,  but 


57 


the  technology  is  still  far  from  demonstrated,  and  the  U.S.  Forest 
Service  has  recently  abandoned  further  lightning  experiments.2 

Lewis  O.  Grant  recently  summarized  the  state  of  general  disagree- 
ment on  the  status  of  weather  modification  technology  and  its  readiness 
for  application. 

There  is  a  wide  diversity  of  opinion  on  weather  modification.  Some  believe 
that  weather  modification  is  now  ready  for  widespread  application.  In  strong 
contrast,  others  hold  that  application  of  the  technology  may  never  be  possible 
or  practical  on  any  substantial  scale.3 

He  concludes  that — 

Important  and  steady  advances  have  been  made  in  developing  technology  for 
applied  weather  modification,  but  complexity  of  the  problems  and  lack  of  ade- 
quate research  resources  and  commitment  retard  progress.4 

In  1975,  David  Atlas,  then  president  of  the  American  Meteorologi- 
cal Society,  expressed  the  following  pessimistic  opinion  on  the  status 
of  weather  modification  technology : 

Almost  no  one  doubts  the  economic  and  social  importance  of  rainfall  augmenta- 
tion, hail  suppression,  fog  dissipation,  and  severe  storm  abatement.  But  great 
controversy  continues  about  just  what  beneficial  modification  effects  have  been 
demonstrated  or  are  possible.  Claims  and  counterclaims  abound.  After  three 
decades  of  intense  research  and  operational  weather  modification  activities,  only 
a  handful  of  experiments  have  demonstrated  beneficial  effects  to  the  general 
satisfaction  of  the  scientific  community. 

To  describe  weather  modification  as  a  "technology"  is  to  encourage  misunder- 
standing of  the  state  of  the  weather  modification  art.  The  word  "technology" 
implies  that  the  major  substantive  scientific  foundations  of  the  field  have  been 
established  and.  therefore,  that  all  that  is  required  is  to  develop  and  apply  tech- 
niques. But  one  of  the  conclusions  of  the  special  AMS  study  on  cloud  physics  was 
that  "the  major  bottleneck  impeding  developments  of  useful  deliberate  weather 
modification  techniques  is  the  lack  of  an  adequate  scientific  base."  5 

At  a  1975  workshop  on  the  present  and  future  role  of  weather  modi- 
fication in  agriculture,  a  panel  of  10  meteorologists  assessed  the  ca- 
pabilities for  modifying  various  weather  and  weather-related  phenom- 
ena, both  for  the  present  and  for  the  period  10  to  20  years  in  the  fu- 
ture. Conclusions  from  this  assessment  are  summarized  in  table  1.  The 
table  shows  estimated  capabilities  for  both  enhancement  and  dissipa- 
tion, and  includes  percentages  of  change  and  areas  affected,  where 
appropriate.6 

A  recent  study  by  Barbara  Farhar  and  Jack  Clark  surveyed  the 
opinions  of  551  scientists,  all  involved  in  some  aspect  of  weather  modi- 
fication, on  the  current  status  of  various  weather  modification  technol- 

2  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  "A  U.S.  Policy  to  Enhance  the  Atmospheric 
Environment."  Oct.  21,  1977.  In  testimony  by  Harlan  Cleveland  "Weather  Modification." 
he-ring  before  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  arid  the  Atmosphere.  Comnrtee  on 
Science  and  Technology.  U.S.  House  of  Representatives.  95th  Cong..  1st  sess..  Oct.  26,  1977. 
Washington.  DC  U.S.  Government  Prfnt'nsr  Office.  1077.  pp.  28-30. 

3  Grant.  Lewis  0.,  "Scientific  and  Other  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modification."  In  Wil- 
liam A.  Thomas  (editor).  "Legal  and  Scientific  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modification.' 
Proceedings  of  a  symposium  convened  at  Duke  University,  Mar.  11-12.  1976,  by  the 
National  Conference  of  Lawyers  and  Scientists.  Durham.  N.C.,  Duke  University  Press. 
1977.  p.  7.  . 

4  Ibid.,  p.  17. 

5  Atlas.  David.  "Selling  Atmospheric  Science.  The  President's  Page."  Bulletin  of  the 
American  Meteorological  Societv.  vol.  56.  No.  7.  July  1975.  p.  6SS. 

6  Grant.  Lewis  O.  and  John  D.  Reid  (compilers).  "Workshop  for  an  Assessment  of  the 
Present  and  Potential  Role  of  Weather  Modification  in  Agricultural  Production."  Colorado 
State  Universitv.  Fort  Collins.  Colo.,  July  15-1S.  1975.  August  1975.  PB-245-633.  pp. 
34-44. 


58 


ogies.7  Table  2  is  a  summary  of  the  assessments  of  the  level  of  develop- 
ment for  each  of  12  such  technologies  included  in  the  questionaire  to 
which  the  scientists  responded,  and  table  3  shows  the  estimates  of  ef- 
fectiveness for  7  technologies  where  such  estimates  are  pertinent.  Re- 
sults of  this  study  were  stratified  in  accordance  with  respondents'  af- 
filiation, specific  education,  level  of  education,  age,  and  responsibility 
or  interest  in  weather  modification,  and  tabulated  summaries  of 
opinions  on  weather  modification  in  accordance  with  these  variables  ap- 
pear in  the  report  by  Farhar  and  Clark.8 

TABLE  1.— ASSESSMENT  OF  THE  CAPABILITIES  FOR  MODIFYING  VARIOUS  WEATHER  AND  WEATHER-RELATED 
NATURAL  PHENOMENA,  BASED  ON  THE  OPINIONS  OF  10  METEOROLOGISTS 

[From  Grant  and  Reid,  1975) 


Enhancement  Dissipation 


Amount  Amount 

change  Area  change  Area 

(per-  (square  (per-  (square 

Modified  variable          Now       10  to  20  yr      cent)  miles)  Now      10  to  20  yr       cent)  miles) 


I.  Clouds: 

1.  Cold  stratus   No  (8) 

2.  Warm  stratus   No  (10) 

3.  Fog,  cold  Yes  (10) 

4.  Fog,  warm  Yes  (10) 

5.  Fog,  artifical  (for 

temperature  con- 
trol)  Yes  (10) 

6.  Contrails  Yes  (10) 

7.  Cirrus...   Yes  (5) 

8.  Carbon  black   No  (10) 

9.  Aerosol    Yes  (7) 

II.  Convective  precipitation: 

1.  Isolated  small   Yes  (7) 

2.  Isolated  large   No  (6) 

3.  Squall  lines   Yes  (5) 

4.  Nocturnal   Yes  (5) 

5.  Imbedded  cyclonic. .  Yes  (9) 

6.  Imbedded  Oro- 

graphic  Yes  (9) 

III.  Stratoform  precip- 
itation: 

1.  Orographic  Yes  (10) 

2.  Cyclonic   No  (10) 

3.  Cloud  water  collec- 

tion Yes  (10) 

IV.  Hazards: 

1.  Hail   Yes  (5) 

2.  Lightning   Yes  (7) 

3.  Erosion— wind 

gradient   No  (10) 

4.  Erosion— water 

drop  size   Yes  (5) 

5.  Wind— hurricane         No  (5) 

6.  Tornado.   No  (10) 

7.  Blowdown    No  (5) 

8.  Floods— symoptic  ...  No  (10) 

9.  Floods— mesoscale...  No  (9) 

10.  Drought   No  (10) 

V.  Other: 

1.  Albedo   Yes  (5) 

2.  Surface  roughness...  No  (6) 

3.  Topography  changes.  No  (6) 


Yes  (7)    1-1000 

No  (5)    

Yes  (10)    1-10 

Yes  (10)   1-100 

Yes  (10)   1-10 

Yes (10)    100-1000 

Yes (10)    100-1000 

No  (6)    

Yes  (10)   

Yes (10)    100  10-100 
Yes (7)     15  100-1000 
Yes(S)     20  100-10,000 
Yes  (6)      100  100-1000 
Yes  (10)    30  300-6000 

Yes (10)    20  300-6000 


Yes  (10)  Yes  (10)   1-1000 

No  (8)  Yes  (9)  

Yes  (10)  Yes  (10)    1-1000 

Yes  (10)  Yes  (10)  1-1 

N/A  N/A 

No  (10)  No  (10)    

No  (10)  No  (8)    

N/A  N/A  

N/A  N/A  

Yes  (5)  Yes  (8)     100  10-100 

Yes (5)  Yes (8)      15  10-1000 

No  (8)  Yes  (5)     20  100-10,000 

No  (8)  Yes  (5)      100  100-1000 

Yes  (8)  Yes  (10)    <5  300-6000 

Yes (8)  Yes (10)    20  300-6000 


Yes (10)  10  100-3000  Yes (10)  Yes (10)  10  100-3000 
No  (6)   No  (10)     No  (6)   


Yes (10)  .... 

Yes  (7)  (i) 

Yes  (9)  (■) 

No(10)  .... 


N/A 


100-60,000  Yes 
40,000         Yes  (7) 


N/A 
Yes 

Yes  (9) 


100-60,000 
40,000 


No  (10)     No  (10) 


Yes  (7)  0)         10,000          Yes  (5) 

Yes  (6)    No  (6) 

Yes  (5)    No  (10) 

Yes  (5)     No  (9) 

No  (10)     No  (10) 

Yes  (6)    No  (9) 

No  (10)    Yes  (5) 


Yes  (7)    10,000 

Yes (6)  

Yes (5)  

Yes  (5)  

No  (3)   

Yes  (6)    

Yes  (6)   


Yes (10) 
Yes  (6) 
Yes  (5) 


Yes  (5) 
No  (6) 
No  (6) 


Yes (10)   

Yes  (6)    

Yes (5)   10-100 


1  Uncertain. 


7  Farhar.  Barbnra  C.  and  Jack  A.  Clark.  "Can  Wp  Modify  the  Weather?  a  Survey  of 
Scientists  "  Final  report,  vol.  3  (draft),  Institute  of  Behavioral  Science.  University  of  Colo- 
rado. Boulder,  Colo..  January  1078.  (Based  on  research  supported  by  the  National  Science 
Foundation  under  grants  No*.  ENV74-1R013  AOS.  01-35452,  GI-44087.  and  BRT74-18613, 
as  part  of  "A  Comparative  Analysis  of  Public  Support  of  and  Resistance  to  Weather  Modi- 
fication Projects.")  89  pp. 

*  Ibid. 


59 


TABLE  2— ASSESSMENT  OF  THE  LEVEL  OF  DEVELOPMENT  OF  TWELVE  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  TECHNOLOGIES 
BASED  UPON  A  SURVEY  OF  551  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  SCIENTISTS 

[From  Farhar  and  Clark,  1978] 


Operations1   Research  2      Neither     Don't  know  Other 


Per- 

Per- 

Per- 

Per- 

Per- 

Total 

Weather  modification  technology 

cent 

No. 

cent 

No. 

cent 

No. 

cent 

No. 

cent 

No. 

No. 

Cold  fog  dispersal  

78 

406 

8 

42 

0 

1 

14 

72 

0 

0 

521 

Precipitation    enhancement,    winter  oro- 

Do 

c 
D 

1 1 
1 1 

R7 

u 

1 
1 

Precipitation    enhancement,    winter  oro- 

graphic, maritime  

64 

337 

22 

113 

5 

13 

70 

0 

1 

526 

Hail  suppression   

46 

244 

49 

256 

4 

4 

23 

0 

1 

528 

Precipitation  enhancement,  summer  convec- 

tive,  continental   .  

43 

227 

49 

258 

10 

6 

31 

0 

1 

527 

Precipitation  enhancement,  summer  convec- 

tive,  maritime  

42 

220 

46 

244 

5 

11 

56 

0 

2 

529 

Warm  fog  dispersal...  

33 

170 

48 

253 

3 

18 

92 

0 

0 

518 

Precipitation  enhancement  with  hail  sup- 

pression    

30 

156 

56 

288 

2 

12 

12 

62 

0 

1 

519 

Precipitation  enhancement,  general  storms.. 

25 

128 

58 

300 

5 

28 

12 

64 

0 

2 

522 

Lightning  suppression  

8 

42 

65 

332 

4 

22 

23 

119 

0 

0 

515 

Hurricane  suppression  

4 

19 

75 

388 

4 

23 

17 

88 

0 

2 

520 

Severe  storm  mitigation   

3 

13 

68 

353 

9 

47 

20 

101 

0 

1 

515 

1  This  category  is  a  combination  of  two  responses:  "The  technology  is  ready  for  operational  application"  and  "The 
technology  can  be  effectively  applied;  research  should  continue." 

2  This  category  is  a  combination  of  two  responses:  "The  technology  is  ready  for  field  research  only"  and  "The  technology 
should  remain  at  the  level  of  laboratory  research." 


60 


61 


CLASSIFICATION  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  TECHNOLOGIES 

In  a  previous  review  of  weather  modification  for  the  Congress,  three 
possible  classifications  of  activities  were  identified — these  classifica- 
tions were  in  accordance  with  (1)  the  nature  of  the  atmospheric  proc- 
esses to  be  modified,  (2)  the  agent  or  mechanism  used  to  trigger  or 
bring  about  the  modification,  or  (3)  the  scale  or  dimensions  of  the 
region  in  which  the  modification  is  attempted.9  The  third  classifica- 
tion was  chosen  in  that  study,  where  the  three  scales  considered  were 
the  microscale  (horizontal  distances,  generally  less  than  15  kilometers) , 
the  mesoscale  (horizontal  distances  generally  between  15  and  200 
kilometers),  and  the  macroscale  (horizontal  distances  generally 
greater  than  200  kilometers).10  Examples  of  modification  of  processes 
on  each  of  these  three  scales  are  listed  in  table  4,  data  in  which  are 
from  Hartman.11  Activities  listed  in  the  table  are  illustrative  only, 
and  there  is  no  intent  to  indicate  that  these  technologies  have  been 
developed,  or  even  attempted  in  the  case  of  the  listed  macroscale 
processes. 

TABLE  4.— WEATHER  AND  CLIMATE  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  CLASSIFIED  ACCORDING  TO  THE  SCALE  OR 
DIMENSIONS  OF  THE  REGION  IN  WHICH  THE  MODIFICATION  IS  ATTEMPTED 

[Information  from  Hartman,  19661 
Scale  Horizontal  dimensions  Examples  of  modification  processes 


Microscale   Less  than  15  km  

Mesoscale   15  to  200  km.  

Macroscale  Greater  than  200  km. 


Modification  of  human  microclimates. 
Modification  of  plant  microclimates. 
Evaporation  suppression. 
Fog  dissipation. 
Cloud  dissipation. 
Hail  prevention. 

Precipitation  through  individual  cloud  modification. 

Precipitation  from  cloud  systems. 

Hurricane  modification. 

Modification  of  tornado  systems. 

Changes  to  global  atmospheric  circulation  patterns. 

Melting  the  Arctic  icecap. 

Diverting  ocean  currents. 


In  this  chapter  the  characteristics  and  status  of  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  will  be  classified  and  discussed  according  to  the  nature 
of  the  processes  to  be  modified.  This  seems  appropriate  since  such  a 
breakdown  is  more  consonant  with  the  manner  the  subject  has  been 
popularly  discussed  and  debated,  and  it  is  consistent  with  the  direc- 
tions in  which  various  operational  and  research  activities  have  moved. 
Classification  by  the  second  criterion  above,  that  is,  by  triggering 
agent  or  mechanism,  focuses  on  technical  details  of  weather  modi- 
fication, not  of  chief  interest  to  the  public  or  the  policymaker,  although 
these  details  will  be  noted  from  time  to  time  in  connection  with  dis- 
cussion of  the  various  weather  modification  activities. 

In  the  following  major  section,  then,  discussion  of  the  principles 
and  the  status  of  planned  weather  modification  will  be  divided  accord- 


9  Hartman.  Lawton  M..  "Characteristics  and  Scope  of  Weather  Modification.  In  U.S. 
Congress,  Senate  Committee  on  Commerce.  "Weather  Modification  and  Control,"  TV  ashing- 
ton.  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1966.  (89th  Cone:..  2d  sess.,  Senate  Kept.  JSo. 
1139.  prepared  by  the  Legislative  Reference  Service,  Library  of  Congress),  p.  20. 

10  Ibid. 

"  Ibid.,  pp.  21-31. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  7 


62 


ing  to  the  major  broad  categories  of  phenomena  to  be  modified;  these 
will  include : 

Precipitation  augmentation. 

Hail  suppression. 

Fog  dissipation. 

Lightning  suppression. 

Severe  storm  mitigation. 
In  subsequent  major  sections  of  this  chapter  there  are  reviews  of 
some  of  the  specific  technical  problem  areas  common  to  most  weather 
modification  activities  and  a  summary  of  recommenced  research 
activities. 

In  addition  to  the  intentional  changes  to  atmospheric  phenomena 
discussed  in  this  chapter,  it  is  clear  that  weather  and  climate  have  also 
been  modified  inadvertently  as  the  result  of  man's  activities  and  that 
modification  can  also  be  brought  about  through  a  number  of  natur- 
ally occurring  processes.  These  unintentional  aspects  of  weather  and 
climate  modification  will  be  addressed  in  the  following  chapter  of 
this  report.12 

Principles  and  Status  of  Weather  Modification  Technologies 

Before  discussing  the  status  and  technologies  for  modification  of 
precipitation,  hail,  fog,  lightning,  and  hurricanes,  it  may  be  useful  to 
consider  briefly  the  basic  concepts  of  cloud  modification.  The  two  major 
principles  involved  are  (1)  colloidal  instability  and  (2)  dynamic  ef- 
fects. Stanley  Changnon  describes  how  each  of  these  principles  can 
be  effective  in  bringing  about  desired  changes  to  the  atmosphere : 13 

Altering  colloidal  stability. — The  physical  basis  for  most  weather  modification 
operations  has  been  the  belief  that  seeding  with  certain  elements  would  produce 
colloidal  instability  in  clouds,  either  prematurely,  to  a  greater  degree,  or  with 
greater  efficiency  than  in  nature.  Most  cloud  seeding  presumes  that  at  least  a  por- 
tion of  the  treated  cloud  is  supercooled,  that  nature  is  not  producing  any  or 
enough  ice  at  that  temperature  of  the  cloud,  and  that  treatment  with  chemical 
agents  of  refrigerants  will  change  a  proportion  of  the  cloud  to  ice.  The  resultant 
mixture  of  water  and  ice  is  unstable  and  there  is  a  rapid  deposition  of  water 
vapor  upon  the  ice  and  a  simultaneous  evaporation  of  water  from  the  super- 
cooled droplets  in  the  cold  part  of  the  cloud.  The  ice  crystals  so  formed  become 
sufficiently  large  to  fall  relative  to  remaining  droplets,  and  growth  by  collection 
enhances  the  probability  that  particles  of  ice  or  water  will  grow  to  be  large 
enough  to  fall  from  the  cloud  and  become  precipitation. 

This  process  of  precipitation  enhancement  using  ice  nucleants  has  been  dem- 
onstrated for  the  stratiform  type  cloud,  and  generally  for  those  which  are  oro- 
graphically-produced  and  supercooled.  Cumulus  clouds  in  a  few  regions  of  the 
United  States  have  also  been  examined  for  the  potential  of  colloidal  instability  in 
their  supercooled  portions.  This  has  been  founded  on  beliefs  that  precipitation 
(1)  can  be  initiated  earlier  than  by  natural  causes,  or  (2)  can  be  produced  from 
a  cloud  which  was  too  small  to  produce  precipitation  naturally. 

Seeding  in  the  warm  portion  of  the  cloud,  or  in  "warm  clouds"  (below  the 
freezing  level),  has  also  been  attempted  so  as  to  alter  their  colloidal  instability. 
Warm-cloud  seeding  has  primarily  attempted  to  provide  the  large  droplets  neces- 
sary to  initiate  the  coalescence  mechanism,  and  is  of  value  in  clouds  where  insuffi- 
cient large  drops  exist.  In  general  alteration  of  the  coalescence  process  primarily 
precipitates  out  the  liquid  water  naturally  present  in  a  cloud,  whereas  the  ice- 
crystal  seeding  process  also  causes  a  release  of  latent  energy  that  conceivably 
results  in  an  intensification  of  the  storm,  greater  cloud  growth,  and  additional 
precipitation. 

Alirrhifj  cloud  dynamics. — The  effects  to  alter  the  colloidal  instability  of 
clouds,  or  their  microphysical  processes,  have  been  based  on  the  concept  of  rain 

1L'  Sof  p.  145. 

13  Chnncrnon.  Stanley  A..  Jr.  "Prosont  and  Future  of  Woathor  Modification  ;  Peprtonal 
Issues."  The  Journal  of  Woathor  Mortification,  vol.  7.  No.  1,  April  1075,  pp.  154-156. 


63 


increase  through  increasing  the  precipitation  efficiency  of  the  cloud.  Simpson 
and  Dennis  (1972)  showed  that  alterations  of  cloud  size  and  duration  by  "dynam- 
ic modification"  could  produce  much  more  total  rainfall  than  just  altering  the 
precipitation  efficiency  of  the  single  cloud.  In  relation  to  cumulus  clouds, 
"dynamic  seeding"  simply  represents  alteration  one  step  beyond  that  sought 
in  the  principle  of  changing  the  colloidal  stability.  In  most  dynamic  seeding 
efforts,  the  same  agents  are  introduced  into  the  storm  but  often  with  a  greater 
concentration,  and  in  the  conversion  of  wrater  to  ice,  enormous  amounts  of 
latent  heat  are  hopefully  released  producing  a  more  vigorous  cloud  which  will 
attain  a  greater  height  with  accompanying  stronger  updrafts,  a  longer  life,  and 
more  precipitation.  Seeding  to  produce  dynamic  effects  in  cloud  growth,  whether 
stratiform  or  cumuliform  types,  is  relatively  recent  at  least  in  its  serious  in- 
vestigation, but  it  may  become  the  most  important  technique.  If  through  con- 
trolled cloud  seeding  additional  uplift  can  be  produced,  the  productivity  in  terms 
of  rainfall  will  be  higher  whether  the  actual  precipitation  mechanism  involved 
is  natural  or  artificial. 

It  has  been  proposed  that  the  selective  seeding  of  cumulus  clouds  also  can 
either  (a)  bring  upon  a  merger  of  twTo  or  more  adjacent  clouds  and  a  much 
greater  rainfall  production  through  a  longer-lived,  larger  cloud  *  *  *  or  (b)  pro- 
duce eventually  an  organized  line  of  clouds  (through  selective  seeding  of  ran- 
domized cumulus).  The  latter  could  allegedly  be  accomplished  by  minimizing  and 
organizing  the  energy  into  a  few  vigorous  systems  rather  than  a  larger  number  of 
isolated  clouds. 

Essentially,  then,  dynamic  seeding  is  a  label  addressed  to  processes  involved 
in  altering  cloud  microphysics  in  a  selective  and  preferential  way  to  bring 
upon  more  rainfall  through  an  alteration  of  the  dynamical  properties  of  the 
cloud  system  leading  to  the  development  of  stronger  clouds  and  mesoscale 
systems.  Actually,  dynamic  effects  might  be  produced  in  other  ways  such  as 
alterations  of  the  surface  characteristics  to  release  heat,  by  the  insertion  of 
chemical  materials  into  dry  layers  of  the  atmosphere  to  form  clouds,  or  by  re- 
distribution of  precipitation  through  microphysical  interactions  in  cloud  processes. 

The  various  seeding  materials  that  have  been  used  for  cloud  modi- 
fication are  intended,  at  least  initially,  to  change  the  microphysical 
cloud  structure.  Minute  amounts  of  these  materials  are  used  with  the 
hope  that  selected  concentrations  delivered  to  specific  portions  of  the 
cloud  will  trigger  the  desired  modifications,  through  a  series  of  rapid 
multiplicative  reactions.  Seeding  materials  most  often  used  are  classi- 
fied as  (1)  ice  nuclei,  intended  to  enhance  nucleation  in  the  super- 
cooled part  of  the  cloud,  or  (2)  hygroscopic  materials,  designed  to 
alter  the  coalescence  process.14 

Glaciation  of  the  supercooled  portions  of  clouds  has  been  induced 
by  seeding  with  various  materials.  Dry  ice  injected  into  the  subfreezing 
part  of  a  cloud  or  of  a  supercooled  fog  produces  enormous  numbers  of 
ice  crystals.  Artificial  ice  nuclei,  with  a  crystal  structure  closely  re- 
sembling that  of  ice,  usually  silver  iodide  smoke  particles,  can  also 
produce  glaciation  in  clouds  and  supercooled  fogs.  The  organic  fer- 
tilizer, urea,  can  also  induce  artificial  glaciation,  even  at  temperatures 
slightly  warmer  than  freezing.  Urea  might  also  enhance  coalescence  in 
warm  clouds  and  warm  fogs.  Water  spray  and  fine  particles  of  sodium 
chloride  have  also  been  used  in  hygroscopic  seeding,  intended  to  alter 
the  coalescence  process.  There  have  been  attempts  to  produce  co- 
alescence in  clouds  or  fog  using  artificial  electrification,  either  with 
chemicals  that  increase  droplet  combination  by  electrical  forces,  or 
with  surface  arrays  of  charged  wires  whose  discharges  produce  ions 
which,  attached  to  dust  particles,  may  be  transported  to  the  clouds.15 

Problems  of  cloud  seeding  technology  and  details  of  seeding  deliv- 
ery methods  are  discussed  in  a  later  section  of  this  chapter,  as  are 


14  Ibid.,  p.  156. 

15  Ibid.,  pp.  156-157. 


64 


some  proposed  techniques  for  atmospheric  modification  that  go  beyond 
cloud  seeding.16 

PRECIPITATION  AUGMENTATION 

The  seeding  of  clouds  to  increase  precipitation,  either  rainfall  or 
snowfall,  is  the  best  known  and  the  most  actively  pursued  weather 
modification  activity.  Changes  in  clouds  and  precipitation  in  the 
vicinity  of  cloud  seeding  operations  have  shown  unquestionaBly  that 
it  is  possible  to  modify  precipitation.  There  is  evidence,  however, 
that  such  modification  attempts  do  not  always  increase  precipitation, 
but  that  under  some  conditions  precipitation  may  actually  be  de- 
creased, or  at  best  no  net  change  may  be  effected  over  an  area.  Never- 
theless, continued  observations  of  clouds  and  precipitation,  from  both 
seeded  and  nonseeded  regions  and  from  both  experiments  and  com- 
mercial operations,  are  beginning  to  provide  valuable  information 
which  will  be  useful  for  distinguishing  those  conditions  for  which 
seeding  increases,  decreases,  or  has  no  apparent  effect  on  precipita- 
tion. These  uncertainties  were  summarized  in  one  of  the  conclusions 
in  a  recent  study  on  weather  modification  by  the  National  Academy 
of  Sciences : 17 

The  Panel  now  concludes  on  the  basis  of  statistical  analysis  of  well-designed 
field  experiments  that  ice-nuclei  seeding  can  sometimes  lead  to  more  precipita- 
tion, can  sometimes  lead  to  less  precipitation,  and  at  other  times  the  nuclei 
have  no  effect,  depending  on  the  meteorological  conditions.  Recent  evidence  has 
suggested  that  it  is  possible  to  specify  those  microphysical  and  mesophysical 
properties  of  some  cloud  systems  that  determine  their  behavior  following 
artificial  nucleation. 

Precipitation  enhancement  has  been  attempted  mostly  for  two  gen- 
eral types  of  cloud  forms,  both  of  which  naturally  provide  precipita- 
tion under  somewhat  different  conditions.  Convective  or  cumulus 
clouds  are  those  which  are  formed  by  rising,  unstable  air,  brought 
about  by  heating  from  below  or  cooling  in  the  upper  layers.  Under 
natural  conditions  cumulus  clouds  may  develop  into  cumulo-nimbus 
or  "thunderheads,"  capable  of  producing  heavy  precipitation.  Cu- 
mulus clouds  and  convective  systems  produce  a  significant  portion 
of  the  rain  in  the  United  States,  especially  during  critical  growing 
seasons.  Attempts  to  augment  this  rainfall  from  cumulus  clouds 
under  a  variety  of  conditions  have  been  underway  for  some  years 
with  generally  uncertain  success.  The  other  type  of  precipitation- 
producing  clouds  of  interest  to  weather  modifiers  are  the  orographic 
clouds,  those  which  are  formed  when  horizontally  moving  moisture- 
laden  air  is  forced  to  rise  over  a  mountain.  As  a  result  of  the  cooling 
as  the  air  rises,  clouds  form  and  precipitation  often  falls  on  the 
windward  side  of  the  mountain.  Through  seeding  operations,  there 
have  been  attempts  to  augment  precipitation  through  acceleration 
of  this  process,  particularly  in  winter,  in  order  to  increase  mountain 
snowpack. 

Figures  1  and  2  show  regions  of  the  coterminous  United  States 
which  are  conducive  to  precipitation  management  through  seeding 
of  spring  and  summer  convective  clouds  and  through  seeding  oro- 
graphic cloud  systems,  respectively.  The  principles  of  precipitation 

16  See  pp.  115  and  129. 

17  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Research  Council,  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  Washington,  D.C., 
1973,  p.  4. 


65 

enhancement  for  both  cumulus  and  orographic  clouds,  and  the  present 
state  of  knowledge  and  technology  for  such  modification,  are  dis- 
cussed in  the  following  sections. 


Figure  1. — Regions  where  preciptation  management  may  be  applied  to  enhance 
rainfall  from  spring  and  summer  showers. 


Figure  2.— Regions  where  precipitation  management  may  be  applied  to  enhance 
snowfall  from  winter  orographic  weather  systems,  thus  augmenting  spring  and 
summer  runoff  from  mountain  snowpacks. 


66 


Currmlus  clouds 

If  air  containing  moisture  is  cooled  sufficiently  and  if  condensation 
nuclei  such  as  dust  particles  are  present,  precipitation  may  be  pro- 
duced. This  process  occurs  when  air  is  forced  to  rise  by  convection, 
so  that  the  water  vapor  condenses  into  clouds.  Cumulus  clouds  are  the 
woolly  vertical  clouds  with  a  flat  base  and  somewhat  rounded  fop, 
whose  origin  can  always  be  traced  to  the  convection  process.  They  can 
most  often  be  observed  during  the  summer  and  in  latitudes  of  high 
temperature.  When  updrafts  become  strong  under  the  proper  con- 
ditions, cumulus  clouds  often  develop  into  cumulonimbus  clouds,  the 
principal  producer  of  precipitation.  About  three-fourths  of  the  rain 
in  the  tropics  and  subtropics  and  a  significant  portion  of  that  falling 
on  the  United  States  is  provided  from  cumulus  clouds  and  convective 
systems. 

The  science  of  cloud  study,  begun  in  the  1930's  and  greatly  expanded 
following  World  War  II,  includes  two  principal  aspects — cloud  micro- 
physics  and  cloud  dynamics.  Though  once  approached  separately  by 
different  groups  of  scientists,  these  studies  are  now  merging  into  a 
single  discipline.  In  cloud  physics  or  microphysics  the  cloud  parti- 
cles— such  as  condensation  and  freezing  nuclei,  water  droplets,  and  ice 
crystals — are  studied  along  with  their  origin,  growth,  and  behavior. 
Cloud  dynamics  is  concerned  with  forces  and  motions  in  clouds,  the 
prediction  of  cloud  structure,  and  the  life  cycle  of  updrafts  and  down- 
drafts.18 

For  cloud  modification  purposes,  present  theories  of  microphysical 
processes  provide  an  ample  basis  for  field  seeding  experiments ;  how- 
ever, further  work  is  still  needed  on  laboratory  experiments,  improved 
instrumentation,  and  research  on  assumptions.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  processes  in  cloud  dynamics  are  not  completely  understood  and 
require  continued  research.19 

Most  cumulus  clouds  evaporate  before  they  have  had  opportunity 
to  produce  precipitation  at  the  Earth's  surface.  In  fact  many  clouds 
begin  to  dissipate  at  about  the  same  time  that  rain  emerges  from  their 
bases,  leading  to  the  impression  that  they  are  destroyed  by  the  forma- 
tion of  precipitation  within  them.  This  phenomenon  is  not  yet  fully 
understood.  Cumulus  clouds  have  a  life  cycle;  they  are  born,  mature, 
and  eventually  age  and  die.  Small  cumuli  of  the  trade  regions  live  only 
about  5  to  10  minutes,  while  medium-sized  ones  exist  for  about  30  min- 
utes. On  the  other  hand,  a  giant  cumulonimbus  cloud  in  a  hurricane 
or  squall  line  may  be  active  for  one  to  several  hours.  In  its  lifetime  it 
may  exchange  over  50  million  tons  of  water,  producing  heavy  rain, 
lightning,  and  possibly  hail.  At  all  times,  however,  a  cumulus  cloud 
struggles  to  exist;  there  is  a  precarious  balance  between  the  forces 
aiding  its  growth  and  its  destruction.20 

The  increasing  capability  to  simulate  cloud  processes  on  the  com- 
puter has  been  a  major  advance  toward  understanding  cloud  modifi- 
cation.  The  ways  in  which  cloud  microphysics  influences  convective 


18  Simpson  Joanne  and  Arnett  S.  Dennis,  "Cumulus  Clouds  and  Their  Modification.  In 
Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification."  New  York,  John  Wiley  &  Sons, 

^'^Mo'schandreas,  Demetrios  J  .  and  Irving  Leichter.  "Present  Capabilities  to  Modify 
Cumulus  Clouds."  Geomet.  Inc.  report  No.  EF-46.H.  Final  report  for  U.S.  Navy  Environ- 
mental Prediction  Research  Facility,  Mar.  :U),  1976.  p.  209.  . 

20  Simpson  and  Dennis,  "Cumulus  Clouds  and  Their  Modification,    1947,  pp.  234-23o. 


67 


dynamics  are  not  well  documented  or  modeled,  however.  Feedback 
mechanisms  are  dynamic  and  thermodynamic.  Dynamically,  the  buoy- 
ancy is  reduced  by  the  weight  of  the  particles  formed  within  the 
cloud,  sometimes  called  "water  loading/'  Modeling  suggests  that 
thermodynamic  feedback  from  the  microphysics  can  be  even  more 
important,  as  evaporation  at  the  edges  of  the  cloud  produces  cooling 
and  thus  induces  downdrafts.  Observations  confirm  this  important 
influence  of  evaporation,  particularly  where  the  cloud  environment  is 
relatively  dry,  but  the  effect  is  minimized  in  humid  tropical  regions.21 

Cumulus  modification  experiments 

An  enormous  amount  of  energy  is  expended  in  natural  atmospheric 
processes.  As  much  energy  as  the  fusion  energy  of  a  hydrogen  super- 
bomb is  released  in  a  large  thunderstorm,  and  in  a  moderate -strength 
hurricane  the  equivalent  of  the  energy  of  400  bombs  is  converted  each 
clay.  In  his  attempt  to  modify  precipitation  from  clouds,  man  must 
therefore  look  for  some  kind  of  a  trigger  mechanism  by  which  such 
energetically  charged  activities  can  be  controlled,  since  he  cannot  hope 
to  provide  even  a  fraction  of  the  energy  involved  in  the  natural  proc- 
ess. A  major  problem  in  evaluating  modification  efforts  is  the  large 
natural  variability  in  atmospheric  phenomena.  A  cumulus  cloud  can, 
in  fact,  do  almost  anything  all  by  itself,  without  any  attempt  to  mod- 
ify its  activity  by  man.  This  high  variability  has  led  the  layman  to 
overestimate  grossly  what  has  been  and  can  be  done  in  weather  modifi- 
cation. In  designing  an  experiment,  this  variability  requires  that  there 
be  sound  statistical  controls.22 

Precipitation  is  formed  by  somewhat  different  processes  in  warm 
clouds  and  in  subfreezing  clouds.  In  the  former,  droplets  are  formed 
from  condensation  of  water  vapor  on  condensation  nuclei  and  grow 
through  collision  and  coalescence  into  raindrops.  In  subfreezing 
clouds,  such  as  the  cumuli  under  discussion,  supercooled  water  drop- 
lets are  attached  to  ice  nuclei  which  grow  into  larger  ice  particles. 
When  large  enough,  these  particles  fall  from  the  cloud  as  snow  or  sleet 
or  may  be  converted  to  rain  if  the  temperature  between  the  cloud  and 
the  Earth's  surface  is  sufficiently  warm.  Increasing  precipitation 
through  artificial  means  is  more  readily  accomplished  in  the  case  of 
the  subfreezing  clouds.  In  addition,  attempts  have  been  made  to  pro- 
mote the  merging  of  cumulus  clouds  in  order  to  develop  larger  cloud 
systems  which  are  capable  of  producing  significantly  more  precipita- 
tion than  would  be  yielded  by  the  individual  small  clouds. 

Nearly  all  cumulus  experiments  have  involved  "seeding"  the  clouds 
with  some  kind  of  small  particles.  Sometimes  the  particles  are  dis- 
persed from  the  ground,  using  air  currents  to  move  them  into  the 
clouds.  Most  often  the  materials  are  dispensed  from  aircraft,  by  releas- 
ing them  upwind  of  the  target  clouds,  by  dropping  them  into  the  cloud 
top,  by  using  the  updraft  from  beneath  the  cloud,  or  by  flying  through 
the  cloud.  Although  more  expensive,  aircraft  seeding  permits  more 
accurate  targeting  and  opportunity  for  measurements  and  observa- 
tions. In  the  Soviet  Union,  cumulus  clouds  have  been  seeded  success- 


21  Simpson.  Joanne,  "Precipitation  Augmentation  from  Cumulus  Clouds  and  Systems  : 
Scientific  and  Technical  Foundations."  1975.  Advances  in  Geophysics,  vol.  19.  Xew  York. 
Academic  Press,  1976.  pp.  10-11. 

122  Simpson  and  Dennis,  "Cumulus  Clouds  and  Their  Modification,"  1974,  pp.  240-241. 


68 


fully  with  artillery  shells  and  rockets,  using  radar  to  locate  parts  of 
the  clouds  to  be  seeded.23 

Augmentation  of  precipitation  in  cumulus  clouds  has  been  attempted 
both  by  accelerating  the  coalescence  process  and  by  initiating  ice  parti- 
cle growth  in  the  presence  of  supercooled  water.  In  fact,  these  processes 
are  essentially  identical  in  cumuli  where  the  tops  extend  above  the 
freezing  level. 

Prior  to  the  1960's  nearly  all  supercooled  seeding  experiments  and 
operations  were  concerned  with  attempting  to  increase  precipitation 
efficiency,  based  on  consideration  of  cloud  microstructure.24  This  is 
essentially  a  static  approach,  intended  to  produce  precipitation  by  in- 
creasing the  total  number  of  condensation  nuclei,  through  the  intro- 
duction of  artificial  nuclei  injected  by  seeding  into  or  under  the  clouds. 
This  approach  has  been  moderately  successful  in  convective  storms 
with  conducive  cloud  microstructure  in  a  number  of  locations — Cali- 
fornia, Israel,  Switzerland,  and  Australia — where  clouds  are  often 
composed  of  small  supercooled  droplets,  typical  of  winter  convection 
and  of  continental  air  masses.25  On  the  other  hand,  the  large  cumulus 
clouds  originating  in  tropical  and  subtropical  ocean  regions,  which  are 
evident  over  much  of  the  eastern  United  States  during  the  summer,  are 
much  less  influenced  by  this  static  approach.  A  technique  known  as 
dynamic  seeding  has  shown  promise  in  enhancing  precipitation  from 
clouds  of  this  type. 

According  to  dynamic  seeding  philosophy,  the  strength,  size,  and 
duration  of  vertical  currents  within  the  cloud  have  stronger  control  on 
cumulus  precipitation  than  does  the  microstructure.  In  this  technique, 
first  demonstrated  in  the  1960?s,  the  seeding  provides  artificial  nuclei 
around  which  supercooled  water  freezes,  liberating  large  quantities  of 
latent  heat  of  fusion,  within  the  clouds,  causing  them  to  become  more 
buoyant  and  thus  to  grow  to  greater  heights.  This  growth  invigorates 
circulation  within  the  cloud,  causes  increased  convergence  at  its  base, 
fosters  more  efficient  processing  of  available  moisture,  and  enhances 
rainfall  through  processes  by  which  cumuli  ordinarily  produce  such 
precipitation.  Results  of  the  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment 
(FACE) ,  conducted  by  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  seem  to  in- 
dicate that  dynamic  seeding  has  been  effective  in  increasing  the  sizes 
and  lifetimes  of  individual  cumuli  and  the  localized  rainfall  resulting 
from  them.20 

Success  thus  far  in  rain  enhancement  from  dynamic  seeding  of 
cumulus  has  been  demonstrated  through  seeding  techniques  applied 
to  single,  isolated  clouds.  In  addition  to  the  experiments  in  Florida, 
dynamic  seeding  of  single  clouds  has  been  attempted  in  South  Dakota, 
Pennsylvania,  Arizona,  Australia,  and  Africa,  with  results  similar  to 
those  obtained  in  Florida.27  It  appears,  however,  that  a  natural  process 
necessary  for  heavy  and  extensive  convective  rainfall  is  the  merger 
of  cloud  groups.  Thus,  this  process  of  cloud  merger  must  be  promoted 
in  order  for  cloud  seeding  to  be  effective  in  augmenting  rainfall  from 

23  Ibid.,  p.  242. 

24  Ibid.,  1974,  pp.  246-247. 

25  Ibid.,  p.  247.  ,   -  „ 

26  William  L.  Woodley.  Joanne  Simpson.  Ronald  Biondini,  and  Joyce  Berkeley.  "Rainfall 
Results.  1970-I97.r>  ;  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment,"  Science,  vol.  ID'S.  No.  4280.  Feb.  2f>. 
1077.  p.  735. 

-~  Simpson  and  Dennis,  "Cumulus  Clouds  and  Their  Modification."  1974,  p.  261. 


69 


cumulus  clouds.  The  FACE  experiment  has  been  designed  to  investi- 
gate whether  dynamic  seeding  can  induce  such  cloud  merger  and  in- 
creased rainfall.28  Area  wide  cumulus  cloud  seeding  experiments  are 
also  planned  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior's  High  Plains 
Cooperative  program  (HIPLEX),  being  conducted  in  the  Great 
Plains  region  of  the  United  States.29  30  There  has  been  some  indication 
that  desired  merging  has  been  accomplished  in  the  Florida  experi- 
ment.31 Though  this  merging  and  other  desirable  effects  may  be 
achieved  for  Florida  cumulus,  it  must  be  established  that  such  mergers 
can  also  be  induced  for  other  connective  systems  which  are  found  over 
most  of  the  United  States  east  of  the  Great  Plains.  Changnon  notes 
that,  "The  techniques  having  the  most  promise  for  rain  enhancement 
from  convective  clouds  have  been  developed  for  single,  isolated  types 
of  convective  clouds.  The  techniques  have  been  explored  largely 
through  experimentation  with  isolated  mountain-type  storms  or  with 
isolated  semitropical  storms.  *  *  *  Weather  modification  techniques 
do  not  exist  for  enhancing  precipitation  from  the  multicellular  con- 
vective storms  that  produce  60  to  90  percent  of  the  warm  season 
rainfall  in  the  eastern  two-thirds  of  the  United  States."  32 

Effectiveness  of  precipitation  enhancement  research  and  operations 

A  major  problem  in  any  precipitation  enhancement  project  is  the 
assessment  of  whether  observed  increases  following  seeding  result  from 
such  seeding  or  occur  as  part  of  the  fluctuations  in  natural  precipita- 
tion not  related  to  the  seeding.  This  evaluation  can  be  attempted 
through  observations  of  physical  changes  in  the  cloud  system  which 
has  been  seeded  and  through  statistical  studies. 

Physical  evaluation  requires  theoretical  and  experimental  investi- 
gations of  the  dispersal  of  the  seeding  agent,  the  manner  that  seeding 
has  produced  changes  in  cloud  microstructure,  and  changes  in  gross 
characteristics  of  a  cloud  or  cloud  system.  Our  understanding  of  the 
precipitation  process  is  not  sufficient  to  allow  us  to  predict  the  magni- 
tude, location,  and  time  of  the  start  of  precipitation.  Hence,  because 
of  this  lack  of  detailed  understanding  and  the  high  natural  variability 
of  precipitation,  it  is  necessary  to  use  statistical  methods  as  well.  There 
is  a  closer  physical  link  between  seeding  and  observable  changes  in 
cloud  microstructure ;  however,  even  the  latter  can  vary  widely  with 
time  and  position  in  natural,  unseeded  clouds,  so  that  statistical  evalua- 
tion is  also  required  with  regard  to  the  measurement  of  these 
quantities.33 

It  should  first  be  determined  whether  the  seeding  agent  reached 
the  intended  region  in  the  cloud  with  the  desired  concentration  rather 


^Woodley,  et  al..  "Rainfall  Results,  1970-1975;  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment, 
1977.  p.  735. 

29  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  "High  Plains  Cooperative 
Program  :  Progress  and  Planning  Report  No.  2,"  Denver.  March  1976.  p.  5. 

30  The  history,  purposes,  organization,  and  participants  in  the  FACE  and  HIPLEX  pro- 
grams are  discussed  along  with  other  programs  of  Federal  agencies  in  chapter  o  or  tms 
report.  _       .       L  „ 

31  William  L.  Woodley  and  Robert  I.  Sax.  "The  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment :  Ka- 
tionale.  Design.  Procedures.  Results,  and  Future  Course."  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce. 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Environmental  Research  Laboratories. 
NOAA  technical  report  ERL  354-WMPO  6.  Boulder,  Colo.,  January  19 , 6  pp.  41-4o. 

32  Changnon,  Stanley  A..  Jr.,  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification  :  Regional 

ISS33JWarn9e7r°'jPP'"Th9e ~Deteetabilitv  of  the  Effects  of  Seeding."  In  World  Meteorological  Or- 
ganization. Weather  Modification  Programme,  position  papers  used  in  the  Preparation  of 
the  plan  for  the  Precipitation  Enhancement  Experiment  (PEP),  Precipitation  Enhancement 
Project  Report  No.  2.  Geneva,  November  1976,  annex  I,  p.  43. 


70 


than  spreading  into  other  areas  selected  as  controls.  When  the  agent 
has  been  delivered  by  aircraft,  this  problem  is  usually  minimized, 
though  even  in  this  case,  it  is  desirable  to  learn  how  the  material  has 
diffused  through  the  cloud.  When  ground-based  seeding  generators 
are  used,  the  diffusion  of  the  material  should  be  studied  both  by 
theoretical  studies  and  by  field  measurements.  Such  measurements 
may  be  made  on  the  seeding  agent  itself  or  on  some  trace  material 
released  either  with  the  seeding  agent  or  separately ;  this  latter  might 
be  either  a  fluorescent  material  such  as  zinc  sulphide  or  any  of  various 
radioactive  materials.  Sometimes  the  tracer  might  be  tracked  in  the 
cloud  itself,  while  in  other  experiments  it  may  be  sufficient  to  track 
it  in  the  precipitation  at  the  surface.34 

In  looking  for  cloud  changes  resulting  from  seeding,  the  natural 
cloud  behavior  is  needed  as  a  reference;  however,  since  the  character- 
istics of  natural  clouds  vary  so  widely,  it  is  necessary  to  observe  a 
number  of  different  aspects  of  the  properties  and  behavior  of  seeded 
clouds  against  similar  studies  of  unseeded  clouds  in  order  to  be  able 
^o  differentiate  between  the  two.  It  is  further  desirable  to  relate  such 
behavior  being  studied  to  predictions  from  conceptual  and  numerical 
models,  if  possible.  Direct  observations  should  be  augmented  by  radar 
studies,  but  such  studies  should  substitute  for  the  direct  measurements 
only  when  the  latter  are  not  possible.35 

A  statistical  evaluation  is  usually  a  study  of  the  magnitude  of  the 
precipitation  in  the  seeded  target  area  in  terms  of  its  departure  from 
the  expected  value.  The  expected  quantity  can  either  be  determined 
from  past  precipitation  records  or  through  experimental  controls.  Such 
controls  are  established  by  dividing  the  experimental  time  available 
roughly  in  half  into  periods  of  seeding  and  nonseeding,  on  a  random 
basis.  The  periods  may  be  as  short  as  a  day  or  be  1  or  2  weeks  in  dura- 
tion. The  precipitation  measured  during  the  unseeded  period  is  used  as 
a  measure  of  what  might  be  expected  in  the  seeded  periods  if  seeding 
hadn't  occurred.  In  another  technique,  control  areas  are  selected  where 
precipitation  is  highly  correlated  with  that  in  the  target  area  but 
which  are  never  seeded.  The  target  area  is  seeded  on  a  random  basis 
and  its  rainfall  is  compared  with  that  of  the  control  area  for  both 
seeded  and  unseeded  periods.  Another  possibility  includes  the  use  of 
two  areas,  either  of  which  may  be  chosen  for  seeding  on  a  random  basis. 
Comparisons  are  then  made  of  the  ratio  of  precipitation  in  the  lirst 
area  to  that  in  the  second  with  the  first  area  seeded  to  the  same  ratio 
when  the  second  is  also  seeded.  There  are  many  variations  of  these 
basic  statistical  designs,  the  particular  one  being  used  in  a  given  experi- 
ment depending  on  the  nature  of  the  site  and  the  measuring  facilities 
available.  As  with  the  seeding  techniques  employed  and  the  physical 
measurements  which  are  made,  experimental  design  can  only  be  final- 
ized after  a  site  has  been  selected  and  its  characteristics  studied.36 

Results  achieved  through  cumulus  modification 

Cumulus  modification  is  one  of  the  most  challenging  and  controver- 
sial areas  in  weather  modification.  In  some  cases  randomized  seeding 
efforts  in  southern  California  and  in  Israel  have  produced  significant 

Ibid.,  p.  44. 
33  Ibid. 

M  Ibid.,  p.  47). 


71 


precipitation  from  bands  of  winter  cyclonic  storms.  However,  attempts 
have  been  less  promising  in  attributing  increased  rain  during  summer 
conditions  to  definitive  experiments.  There  has  been  some  success  in 
isolated  tropical  cumuli,  where  seeding  has  produced  an  increase  in 
cloud  height  and  as  much  as  a  twofold  to  threefold  increase  in  rain- 
fall.37 

In  the  Florida  area  cumulus  experiment  (FACE),  the  effects  on 
precipitation  over  a  target  area  in  southern  Florida  as  a  result  of 
seeding  cumuli  moving  over  the  area  is  being  studied  under  the  spon- 
sorship of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
(NOAA).  Analysis  of  the  data  from  48  days  of  experimentation 
through  1975  provided  no  evidence  that  rainfall  over  the  fixed  target 
area  of  13,000  square  kilometers  had  been  altered  appreciably  from 
dynamic  seeding.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  positive  evidence  for 
increased  precipitation  from  seeding  for  clouds  moving  through  the 
area.38 

When  FACE  data  from  the  1976  season  are  combined  with  previous 
data,  however,  increasing  the  total  number  of  experimental  days  to  75, 
analysis  shows  that  dynamic  seeding  under  appropriate  atmospheric 
conditions  was  effective  in  increasing  the  growth  and  rain  production 
of  individual  cumulus  clouds,  in  inducing  cloud  merger,  and  in  pro- 
ducing rainfall  increases  from  groups  of  convective  clouds  as  they 
pass  through  the  target  area.  A  net  increase  seemed  to  result  from  the 
•seeding  when  rainfall  on  the  total  target  area  is  averaged.39 

Further  discussion  of  FACE  purposes  and  results  is  found  under 
the  summary  of  weather  modification  programs  of  the  Department  of 
Commerce  in  chapter  5.40 

Recent  advances  in  cumulus  cloud  modification 

In  the  past  few  years  some  major  advances  have  been  achieved  in 
cumulus  experimentation  and  in  improvement  of  scientific  under- 
standing. There  has  been  progress  in  (1)  numerical  simulation  of 
cumulus  processes  and  patterning;  (2)  measurement  techniques;  (3) 
testing,  tracing,  delivery,  and  targeting  of  seeding  materials;  and  (4) 
application  of  statistical  tools.  Recognition  of  the  extreme  difficulty  of 
cumulus  modification  and  the  increased  concept  of  an  overall  systems 
approach  to  cumulus  experimentation  have  also  been  major  advances.41 

Orographic  clouds  and  precipitation 

In  addition  to  the  convection  clouds,  formed  from  surface  heating, 
clouds  can  also  be  formed  when  moist  air  is  lifted  above  mountains 
as  it  is  forced  to  move  horizontally.  As  a  result,  rain  or  snow  may  fall, 
and  such  precipitation  is  said  to  be  orographic,  or  mountain  induced. 
The  precipitation  results  from  the  cooling  within  the  cloud  and  charac- 

37  Sax.  R.  I..  S.  A.  Changnon.  L.  O.  Grant.  W.  F.  Hitschfeld.  P.  V.  Hobbs.  A.  M.  Kanan. 
and  J.  Simnson,  "Weather  Modification:  Where  Are  We  Now  and  Where  Should  \\  e  Be 
Going?  An  Editorial  Overview."  Journal  of  Applied  Meteorology,  vol.  14.  No.  o,  August  1975, 
P-  662. 

38  Woodlev,  et  al.,  "Rainfall  Results,  1970-1975  ;  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment. 
1977.  p.  742.  ,       „     . . 

^Woodley.  William  L..  Joanne  Simpson.  Ronald  Biondini.  and  Jill  Jordan.  NOAA  s 
Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment;  Rainfall  Results.  1970-1976  "  In  preprints  from  the 
Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,  Champaign,  111.. 
Oct.  10-13.  1977.  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977,  p.  209. 

40  gee  p  292 

41  Sax.  et.'  ai.  "Weather  Modification  :  Where  Are  We  Now  and  Where  Should  We  Be 
Going?  An  Editorial  Overview,"  1975,  p.  663. 


72 


teristically  falls  on  the  windward  side  of  the  mountain.  As  the  air 
descends  on  the  leeward  side  of  the  mountain,  there  is  warming  and 
dissipation  of  the  clouds,  so  that  the  effect  of  the  mountains  is  to  pro- 
duce a  "rain  shadow"  or  desert  area.  The  Sierra  Nevada  in  western 
North  America  provide  such  conditions  for  orographic  rain  and  snow 
along  the  Pacific  coast  and  a  rain  shadow  east  of  the  mountains  when 
moisture  laden  air  generally  flows  from  the  Pacific  eastward  across 
this  range. 

The  western  United  States  is  a  primary  area  with  potential  for 
precipitation  augmentation  from  orographic  clouds.  This  region  re- 
ceives much  of  its  annual  precipitation  from  orographic  clouds  during 
winter,  and  nearly  all  of  the  rivers  start  in  the  mountains,  deriving 
their  water  from  melting  snowpacks.  The  major  limitation  on  agricul- 
ture here  is  the  water  supply,  so  that  additional  water  from  increased 
precipitation  is  extremely  valuable.  Streamflow  from  melting  snow 
is  also  important  for  the  production  of  hydroelectric  power,  so  that 
augmentation  of  precipitation  during  years  of  abnormally  low  natural 
snowfall  could  be  valuable  in  maintaining  required  water  levels  neces- 
sary for  operation  of  this  power  resource.  Orographic  clouds  provide 
more  than  90  percent  of  the  annual  runoff  in  many  sections  of  the 
western  United  States.42 

Figure  3  (a)  and  (b)  are  satellite  pictures  showing  the  contrast 
between  the  snow  cover  over  the  Sierra  Nevada  on  April  28, 1975,  and 
on  April  19, 1977.  This  is  a  graphical  illustration  of  why  much  of  Cali- 
fornia was  drought  stricken  during  1977.  The  snowpack  which  custo- 
marily persists  in  the  highest  elevations  of  the  Sierras  until  July  had 
disappeared  by  mid-May  in  1977.43 

The  greatest  potential  for  modification  exists  in  the  winter  in  this 
region,  while  requirements  for  water  reach  their  peak  in  the  summer  ; 
hence,  water  storage  is  critical.  Fortunately,  the  snowpack  provides  a 
most  effective  storage,  and  in  some  places  the  snowmelt  lasts  until  early 
July.  Water  from  the  snowmelt  can  be  used  directly  for  hydroelectric 
power  generation  or  for  irrigation  in  the  more  arid  regions,  while 
some  can  be  stored  in  reservoirs  for  use  during  later  months  or  in  sub- 
sequent dry  years.  In  some  regions  where  the  snowpack  storage  is  not 
optimum,  offseason  orographic  precipitation  is  still  of  great  value, 
since  the  water  holding  capacity  of  the  soil  is  never  reached  and  addi- 
tional moisture  can  be  held  in  the  soil  for  the  following  groAving  season. 

Orographic  clouds  are  formed  as  moist  air  is  forced  upward  hy 
underlying  terrain.  The  air  thus  lifted,  containing  water  vapor,  cools 
and  expands.  If  this  lifting  and  cooling  continue,  the  air  parcels  will 
frequently  reach  sal  mat  ion.  If  the  air  becomes  slightly  supersaturated, 
small  droplets  begin  to  form  by  condensation,  and  a  cloud  develops, 
which  seems  to  hang  over  the  mountain  peak.  The  location  where  this 
condensation  occurs  can  be  observed  visually  by  the  edge  of  the  cloud 
on  the  windward  side  of  the  mountain.  Upon  descent  in  the  lee  of  the 
mountain  the  temperature  and  vapor  capacity  of  the  air  parcel  again 


"Grant,  Lewis  O.  and  Archie  M.  Kahan,  "Weather  Modification  for  Augmenting  Oro- 
graphic Precipitation."  In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (editor),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification," 
New  York.  Wiley.  1974.  p.  2S5. 

4:1  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  news  release,  NOAA  77-234.  NO  A  A  Public  Affairs  Office, 
Rockville,  Md.,  Aug.  17,  1077. 


73 


increase,  so  that  any  remaining  liquid  droplets  or  ice  crystals 
evaporate.44 


(a)  April  28,  1975 

Figure  3. — NOAA-3  satellite  pictures  of  the  snowcover  on  the  Sierra  Nevada 
Mountains  in  (a)  April  1975  and  (b)  April  1977.  (Courtesy  of  the  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.) 


44  Sax.  et  al..  "Weather  Mortification  :  Where  Are  We  Now  and  Where  Should  We  Be 
Going?"  an  editorial  overview,  1975,  pp.  657-658. 


74 


] 

(b)  April  19,  1977 

The  supercooled  cloud  droplets  exist  as  liquid  at  temperatures  down 
to  about  -20°  C ;  but  at  temperatures  colder  than  -20°  C,  small  ice 
crystals  begin  to  form  around  nuclei  that  are  naturally  present  in  the 
atmosphere.  Once  formed,  the  ice  crystals  grow  rapidly  because  the 
saturation  vapor  pressure  over  ice  is  less  than  that  over  water.  As  the 
crystals  increase  they  may  fall  and  eventually  may  reach  the  ground 
as  snow.  The  temperature  at  the  top  of  the  cloud  is  an  important 
factor  in  winter  storms  over  mountains,  since  natural  ice  crystals  will 
not  form  in  large  quantities  if  the  cloud  top  is  warmer  than  —20°  C. 
If  the  temperature  is  below  —20°  C,  however,  a  large  fraction  of  the 
cloud  particles  will  fall  as  snow  from  natural  processes.45 


45  Weisbecker,  Leo  W.  (compiler),  "The  Impacts  of  Snow  Enhancement;  Technology 
Assessment  of  Winter  Orographic  Snowpack  Augmentation  in  the  Upper  Colorado  River 
Basin,"  Norman,  Okla.,  University  of  Oklahoma  Press,  1974,  pp.  64-66. 


75 


Orographic  precipitation  modification 

According  to  Grant  and  Kalian,  "  *  *  *  research  has  shown  that 
orographic  clouds  *  *  *  provide  one  of  the  most  productive  and 
manageable  sources  for  beneficial  weather  modification."  46  In  a  re- 
cent study  by  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  it  was  concluded 
broadly  that  orographic  clouds  provide  one  of  the  "main  possibilities 
of  precipitation  augmentation,*'  based  on  the  considerations  below : 47 
A  supply  of  cloud  water  that  is  not  naturally  converted  into 
precipitation  sometimes  exists  for  extended  periods  of  time ; 

Efficient  seeding  agents  and  devices  are  available  for  treating 
these  clouds; 

Seeding  agents  can  sometimes  (not  always)  be  delivered  to 
the  proper  cloud  location  in  proper  concentrations  and  at  the 
proper  time; 

Microphysical  cloud  changes  of  the  type  expected  and  neces- 
sary for  seeding  have  been  demonstrated; 

Substantial  increases  in  precipitation  with  high  statistical  sig- 
nificance have  been  achieved  in  some  well-designed  randomized 
experiments  for  clouds  that,  based  on  physical  concepts,  should 
have  seeding  potential;  and 

Augmentation  of  orographic  precipitation  can  have  great  eco- 
nomic potential. 

Although  natural  ice  crystals  will  not  form  in  sufficient  numbers  if 
the  cloud  top  is  warmer  than  —20°  C,  it  has  been  shown  that  particles 
of  silver  iodide  smoke  will  behave  as  ice  nuclei  at  temperatures  some- 
what warmer  than  —  20°  C,  so  that  ice  crystals  can  be  produced  by  such 
artificial  nuclei  in  clouds  with  temperatures  in  the  range  of  —10°  to 
—  20°  C.  Whereas  in  the  natural  state,  with  few  active  nuclei  at  these 
temperatures,  the  cloud  particles  tend  to  remain  as  water  droplets, 
introduction  of  the  silver  iodide  can  quickly  convert  the  supercooled 
cloud  into  ice  crystals.  Then,  the  natural  growth  processes  allow  the 
crystals  to  grow  to  sufficient  size  for  precipitation  as  snow.48 

Meteorological  factors  which  favor  increased  snowfall  from  oro- 
graphic clouds  through  cloud  seeding  are  summarized  by 
Weisbecker : 49 

The  component  of  the  airflow  perpendicular  to  the  mountain 
ridge  must  be  relatively  strong. 

The  air  must  have  a  high  moisture  content.  Generally,  high 
moisture  is  associated  with  above-normal  temperatures. 

The  cloud,  including  its  upper  boundary,  should  be  at  a  temp- 
erature warmer  than  — 20°  C.  Since  temperature  decreases  with 
increasing  altitude,  this  temperature  criterion  limits  the  altitude 
of  the  cloud  top.  However,  it  is  advantageous  for  the  cloud  base 
to  be  low,  since  the  water  droplet  content  of  the  cloud  will  then 
be  relatively  large. 


46  Grant  and  Kahan,  "Weather  Modification  for  Augmenting  Orographic  Precipitation," 
1974.  p.  282. 

*7  Committee  on  Climate  and  Weather  Fluctuations  and  Agricultural  Production,  National 
Research  Council,  "Climate  and  Food  ;  Climatic  Fluctuation  and  U.S.  Agricultural  Produc- 
tion." National  Academy  of  Sciences.  Washington,  D.C.,  1976,  p.  136. 

48  Weisbecker,  "The  Impacts  of  Snow  Enhancement ;  Technology  Assessment  of  Winter 
Orographic  Snowpack  Augmentation  in  the  Upper  Colorado  Basin,"  1974,  p.  66. 

» Ibid.  pp.  66-67. 


76 


It  must  be  possible  to  disperse  silver  iodide  particles  within  the 
cloud  in  appropriate  numbers  to  serve  as  ice  crystal  nuclei.  If 
ground  generators  are  used,  the  silver  iodide  smoke  must  be  dif- 
fused by  turbulence  and  lifted  by  the  airflow  into  cloud  regions 
where  temperatures  are  colder  than  — 10°  C. 

The  ice  crystals  must  have  time  to  grow  to  a  precipitable  size 
and  to  fall  to  Earth  before  reaching  the  downdrafts  that  exist  on 
the  far  side  of  the  mountain  ridge. 
The  meteorological  conditions  which  are  ideally  suited  for  augment- 
ing artificially  the  snowfall  from  a  layer  of  orographic  clouds  are 
depicted  in  figure  4.  The  figure  also  shows  the  optimum  location  of 
ground-based  silver  iodide  smoke  generators  upwind  of  the  target  area 
as  well  as  the  spreading  of  the  silver  iodide  plume  throughout  the  cloud 
by  turbulent  mixing.  Although  there  are  several  seeding  agents  with 
suitable  properties  for  artificial  ice  nuclei,  silver  iodide  and  lead  iodide 
appear  to  be  most  effective.  Owing  to  the  poisonous  effects  of  lead  com- 
pounds, lead  iodide  has  not  had  wide  use.  The  optimum  silver  iodide 
particle  concentration  is  a  function  of  the  temperature,  moisture,  and 
vertical  currents  in  the  atmosphere ;  it  appears  to  be  in  the  range  from 
5  to  100  nuclei  per  liter  of  cloud.50  While  the  most  common  means  of 
dispersing  silver  iodide  in  mountainous  areas  is  by  ground-based  gen- 
erators, other  methods  of  cloud  seeding  make  use  of  aircraft,  rockets, 
and  balloons. 

In  contrast  to  convective  clouds,  ice  crystal  formation  in  orographic 
clouds  is  thought  to  be  static,  depending  primarily  on  cloud  micro- 
physics,  and  that  orographic  cloud  seeding  has  little  effect  on  the 
general  patterns  of  wind,  pressure,  and  temperature.  On  the  other 
hand,  clouds  formed  primarily  by  convection,  such  as  summer  cumulus 
or  hurricane  clouds,  are  believed  to  be  affected  dynamically  by  seeding 
as  noted  above  in  the  discussion  of  modification  of  convective  clouds.51 
Since  the  lifting  of  the  air  in  winter  mountain  storms  is  mainly  caused 
by  its  passage  over  the  mountain  barrier,  the  release  of  latent  energy 
accompanying  this  lifting  has  little  effect  upon  the  updraft  itself.  In 
convective  cases,  however,  heat  released  through  seeding  increases 
buoyancy  and  lifting,  with  attendant  effects  on  the  wind  and  pressure 
fields.  The  static  nature  of  the  processes  involved  in  orographic  cloud 
modification  therefore  suggests  that  there  is  less  chance  that  the  storm 
dynamics  downwind  of  the  target  area  will  be  altered  appreciably  as  a 
result  of  the  modification  activities.52 


60  Ibid.,  p.  68. 

si  See  p.  68. 

52  Ibid.,  pp.  70-71. 


77 


Figure  4. — Idealized  model  showing  meteorological  conditions  that  should  lead 
to  increased  snowfall  if  clouds  are  seeded  with  silver  iodide  particles.  (From 
Weisbecker,  1974.) 

Orographic  seeding  experiments  and  seeddbility  criteria 

A  randomized  research  weather  modification  program  with  winter 
orographic  storms  in  central  Colorado  was  initiated  by  Colorado  State 
University  in  1959.  Data  on  precipitation  and  cloud  physics  were  col- 
lected for  16  years  under  this  Climax  program,  named  for  the  location 
of  its  target  area  near  Climax,  Colo.  Analysis  of  data  has  shown  pre- 
cipitation increases  between  100  and  200  percent  when  the  average 
temperatures  of  seeded  clouds  at  the  500  millibar  level  were  —  20°C  or 
warmer.  When  corresponding  temperatures  were  —  26°C  to  —  21°C, 
precipitation  changes  ranged  between  —5  and  +6  percent.  For  tem- 
peratures colder  than  —  26°C,  seeded  cloud  systems  produced  decreases 
in  precipitation  ranging  from  22  to  46  percent.53 

While  the  results  of  Climax  have  provided  some  useful  guidelines  in 
establishing  seedability  criteria  of  certain  cloud  systems,  it  has  been 
learned  from  other  experimental  programs  that  direct  transfer  of  the 
Climax  criteria  to  other  areas  is  not  warranted.54  In  particular,  this 
nontransferability  has  been  evident  in  connection  with  analysis  of  re- 
sults from  the  Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project,  conducted  from 
1970  through  1975  in  the  San  Juan  Mountains  of  southwest  Colorado, 
sponsored  by  the  Bureau  of  .Reclamation  of  the  U.S.  Department  of 
the  Interior.55 

Difficulties  are  frequently  encountered  in  attempting  to  evaluate  ex- 
perimental cloud-seeding  programs.  A  major  problem  in  assessing 
results  of  all  cold  orographic  cloud-seeding  projects  stems  from  the 
high  natural  variability  of  cloud  properties.  Frequent  measurements 
are  therefore  required  in  order  to  monitor  these  properties  carefully 
and  consistently  throughout  the  experiment.  Another  set  of  problems 
which  have  troubled  investigators  in  a  number  of  experimental  pro- 
grams follow  from  improper  design.  Such  a  deficiency  can  easily  re- 


53Hjermstad.  Lawrence  M..  "San  Juan  and  Climax."  In  proceedings  of  Special  Weather 
Modification  Conference;  Augmentation  of  Winter  Orographic  Precipitation  in  the  West- 
ern United  States,  San  Francisco,  Nov.  11-13,  1975,  Boston,  American  Meteorological 
Society.  1975,  p.  1  (abstract). 

~4Ibid.,  pp.  7-S.  .  ... 

53  This  nroiect.  part  of  Project  Skywater  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  is  discussed  along 
with  other  programs  of  Federal  agencies  in  chapter  5  of  this  report,  see  p.  2o4. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  8 


78 


suit,  for  example,  if  insufficient  physical  measurements  have  been  taken 
prior  to  establishment  of  the  design  of  the  experiment.56 

Under  Project  Sky  water  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  has  carried  out 
an  analysis  of  data  from  seven  past  weather  modification  projects  in 
order  to  identify  criteria  which  define  conditions  when  cloud  seeding 
will  increase  winter  snowfall  in  mountainous  terrain  and  when  such 
seeding  would  have  no  effect  or  decrease  precipitation.  The  seven 
projects  examined  in  the  study  were  conducted  in  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains, in  the  Sierra  Nevada,  and  in  the  southern  coast  range  in  Cali- 
fornia during  the  1960's  and  1970?s,  in  areas  which  represent  a  wide 
range  of  meteorological  and  topographical  conditions.57 

Figure  5  shows  the  locations  of  the  seven  projects  whose  results  were 
analyzed  in  the  Skywater  study,  and  table  5  includes  more  detailed 
information  on  the  locations  and  dates  of  seeding  operations  for  these 
projects.  General  seedability  criteria  derived  from  this  study  were 
common  to  all  seven  projects,  with  the  expectation  that  the  criteria 
will  also  be  applicable  to  all  winter  orographic  cloud-seeding  projects. 
While  there  have  been  other  efforts  to  integrate  results  from  several 
projects  into  generalized  criteria,  based  only  on  a  few  meteorological 
variables,  Vardiman  and  Moore  considered  11  variables  which  depend 
on  mountain  barrier  shapes  and  sizes  and  on  characteristics  of  the 
clouds.  Some  of  these  variables  are  physically  measurable  while  others 
are  derived  from  simple  computations.58 


Figure  5. — Locations  of  winter  orographic  weather  modification  projects  whose 
results  were  used  to  determine  generalized  cloud  seeding  criteria.  (From  Vardi- 
man and  Moore,  1977. 


MHobbs.  Peter  V,  "Evaluation  of  Cloud  Seeding  Experiments;  Some  Lessons  To  Be 
i.earned  From  the  Cascade  and  San  Juan  Projects."  In  proceedings  of  Special  Weather 
Modification  Conference  ;  Augmentation  of  Winter  Orographic  Precipitation  in  the  West- 
Society  1976 .      af  Francisco,  Nov.  11-13,  1975.  Boston,  American  Meteorological 

"Vardiman.  Tarry  and  James  A.  Moore.  "Generalized  Criteria  for  Seeiing  Winter  Oro- 
graphic Cloudy'  Skywater  monograph  No.  1,  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of 
133  -Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management,  Denver,  July  1977. 

■  Ibid.,  p.  15. 


79 


TABLE  5.— LIST  OF  WINTER  OROGRAPHIC  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  PROJECTS,  GIVING  SITES  AND  SEASONS  OF 
OPERATIONS,  USED  IN  STUDY  TO  DETERMINE  GENERALIZED  CLOUD  SEEDING  CRITERIA 

[From  Vardiman  and  Moore,  1977] 

Project  Site  Seeding  operations 

- 

Bridger  Range  Project  (BGR)   Rocky  Mountains,  Montana   1969-70  to  1971-72  (3  seasons). 

Climax  Project  (CMX)    Rocky  Mountains,  Colorado   1960-61  to  1969-70  (10  seasons). 

Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project  Rocky  Mountains,  Colorado    1970-71  to  1974-75  (5  seasons). 

(CRB). 

Central  Sierra  Research  Experiment  Sierra  Nevada,  California   1968-69  to  1972-73  (5  seasons). 

(CSR). 

Jemez  Mountains  Project  (JMZ)   Rocky  Mountains,  New  Mexico   1968-69  to  1971-72  (4  seasons). 

Pyramid  Lake  Pilot  Project  (PYR)  Sierra  Nevada,  California/Nevada          1972-73  to  1974-75  (3  seasons). 

Santa  Barbara  Project  (SBA)   Southern  Coast  Range,  California          1967-68  to  1973-74(7  seasons). 


Detailed  analyses  were  conducted  on  four  variables  calculated  from 
topography  and  vertical  distributions  of  temperature,  moisture,  and 
winds.  These  are  (1)  the  stability  of  the  cloud,  which  is  a  measure  of 
the  likelihood  that  seeding  material  will  reach  a  level  in  the  cloud 
where  it  can  effect  the  precipitation  process;  (2)  the  saturation  mixing 
ratio  a£  cloudbase,  a  measure  of  the  amount  of  water  available  for 
conversion  to  precipitation;  (3)  the  calculated  cloud  top  temperature, 
a  measure  of  the  number  of  natural  ice  nuclei  available  to  start  the 
precipitation  process;  and  (4)  the  calculated  trajectory  index,  a  meas- 
ure of  the  time  available  for  precipitation  particles  to  form,  grow,  and 
fall  to  the  ground.59 

Results  of  the  study  thus  far  are  summarized  below : 

Seeding  can  increase  precipitation  at  and  near  the  mountain  crest  under  the 
following  conditions: 

Stable  clouds  with  moderate  water  content,  cloud  top  temperatures  between 
—10  and  —30°  C,  and  winds  such  that  the  precipitation  particles  would  be 
expected  to  fall  at  or  near  the  crest  of  the  mountain  barrier. 

Moderately  unstable  clouds  with  moderate-to-high  water  content,  cloud 
top  temperatures  between  —10  and  —30°  C,  and  a  crest  trajectory  for  the  pre- 
cipitation. 

Seeding  appears  to  decrease  precipitation  across  the  entire  mountain  barrier 
under  the  following  condition: 

Unstable  clouds  with  low  water  content,  cloud  top  temperatures  less 
than  —30°  C,  and  winds  such  that  the  precipitation  particles  would 
be  carried  beyond  the  mountain  crest  and  evaporate  before  reaching  the 
ground.*0 


59  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management,  "Sum- 
mary Report ;  Generalized  Criteria  for  Seeding  Winter  Orographic  Clouds.'"  Denver.  March 
1977,  p.  1.  (This  is  a  summary  of  the  report  by  Vardiman  and  Moore  which  is  referenced 
above. ) 

80  Ibid.,  pp.  1-2. 


Rime  ice  conditions  at  sensing  device  which  measures  intensity  of  snowfall. 
(Courtesy  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.) 


81 


Results  quoted  above  represent  only  a  portion  of  the  analyses  which 
are  to  be  carried  out.  Seeding  "window"  bounds  must  be  refined,  and 
the  expected  effect  must  be  converted  into  estimates  of  additional  pre- 
cipitation a  target  area  might  experience  during  a  winter  season.  It  is 
very  unlikely  that  observed  effects  could  have  occurred  by  chance  in 
view  of  the  statistical  tests  which  were  applied  to  the  data.61 

Operational  orographic  seeding  projects 

For  several  decades  commercial  seeding  of  orographic  clouds  for 
precipitation  augmentation  has  been  underway  in  the  western  United 
States,  sponsored  by  specific  users  which  include  utility  companies, 
agricultural  groups,  and  State  and  local  governments.  Much  of  the 
technology  was  developed  in  the  late  forties  and  early  fifties  by  com- 
mercial operators,  with  some  improvements  since.  The  basic  technique 
most  often  used  involves  release  of  silver  iodide  smoke,  usually  from 
ground-based  generators,  along  the  upwind  slopes  of  the  mountain 
where  clouds  are  seeded,  as  shown  schematically  in  figure  6.  It  is  the 
opinion  of  Grant  and  Kahan  that  this  basic  approach  still  appears 
sound  for  seeding  orographic  clouds  over  many  mountain  barriers,  but 
that  in  all  aspects  of  these  operating  programs,  there  have  been  "sub- 
stantial improvements"  as  a  result  of  research  and  development  pro- 
grams.62 They  summarized  the  following  major  deficiencies  of  past 
operational  orographic  seeding  programs : 

1.  The  lack  of  criteria  for  recognizing  the  seedability  of  specific 
clouds. 

2.  The  lack  of  specific  information  as  to  where  the  seeding 
materials  would  go  once  they  are  released. 

3.  The  lack  of  specific  information  as  to  downwind  or  broader 
social  and  economic  effects  from  the  operations. 

4.  The  lack  of  detailed  information  on  the  efficiency  of  seeding 
generators  and  material  being  used  for  seeding  clouds  with  differ- 
ing temperatures.63 


Figure  6. — Schematic  view  of  silver  iodide  generators  placed  upwind  from  a  tar- 
get area  in  the  mountains,  where  orographic  clouds  are  to  be  seeded  for  pre- 
cipitation enhancement  (From  Weisbecker,  1974.) 


61  Ibid.,  p.  2. 

63  Grant  and  Kalian,  "Weather  Modification  for  Augmenting  Orographic  Precipitation," 
1974,  p.  307. 

«  Ibid.,  pp.  307-308. 


82 


Results  achieved  through  orographic  precipitation  modification 

Results  from  several  projects  in  the  western  United  States  have 
shown  that  winter  precipitation  increases  of  10  to  15  percent  are  pos- 
sible if  all  suitable  storms  are  seeded.64  From  randomized  experiments 
at  Climax,  Colo.,  precipitation  increases  of  70  to  80  percent  have  been 
reported.  These  results,  based  on  physical  considerations,  are  repre- 
sentative of  cases  which  have  a  high  potential  for  artificial 
stimulation.65 


64  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  "Reclamation  Research  in  the 
Seventies,"  Second  progress  report.  A  water  resources  technical  publication  research  report 
No.  28,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1977,  p.  2. 

65  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  "Climate  and  Food  ;  Climatic  Fluctuation  and  U.S.  Agri- 
cultural Production,"  1976,  p.  136. 


83 


84 


HAIL  SUPPRESSION 

The  hail  problem 

Along  with  floods,  drought,  and  high  winds,  hail  is  one  of  the  major 
hazards  to  agriculture.  Table  6  shows  the  estimated  average  annual 
hail  loss  for  various  crops  in  the  United  States,  for  each  of  the  18 
States  whose  total  annual  crop  losses  exceed  $10  million.  Also  included 
in  the  table  are  total  losses  for  each  crop  and  for  each  of  the  18  States 
and  the  aggregate  of  the  remaining  States. 

The  following  vivid  description  of  a  hailstorm  conveys  both  a  sense 
of  its  destructiveness  and  some  notion  of  its  capricious  nature : 

At  the  moment  of  its  happening,  a  hailstorm  can  seem  a  most  disastrous  event. 
Crashing  stones,  often  deluged  in  rain  and  hurled  to  the  surface  by  wind,  can 
create  instant  destruction.  Picture  windows  may  he  broken,  cars  dented,  or  a 
whole  field  of  corn  shredded  before  our  eyes. 

Then  quite  quickly,  the  storm  is  over.  Xow  the  damage  is  before  us.  we  per- 
ceive it  to  be  great,  and  we  vow  to  do  something  to  prevent  its  happening  again. 

But  what  we  have  experienced  is  "our"  storm.  Hail  did  not  happen  perhaps  a 
mile  away.  We  may  see  another  the  same  day.  or  never  again.  Thus,  the  concept 
of  hail  suppression  is  founded  in  a  real  or  perceived  need,  but  the  assessment  of 
this  solution  must  be  considered  in  terms  of  the  nature  of  hail.06 


TABLE  6.— ESTIMATED  AVERAGE  HAIL  LOSSES  BY  CROP,  FOR  STATES  WITH  LOSSES  GREATER  THAN  $10,000,000 

[In  millions  of  dollars]1 


Fruits 

Coarse 

and  veg- 

State 

Wheat 

Corn 

Soybeans 

Cotton 

Tobacco 

grains2 

etables 

Total 

Texas  

  16.7 

1.5 

49.1 

16.1 

2.8 

86.2 

Iowa..    

.1 

31.3 

31.6 

3.5 

.3 

66.8 

Nebraska   

16.8 

27.2 

4.1 

4.7 

7.7 

60.5 

Minnesota  

2.3 

17.6 

18.7 

7.5 

2.2 

48.3 

Kansas   

36.1 

2.8 

.9 

4.7 

1.3 

45.8 

North  Dakota.  

28.8 

.6 

.8 

12.5 

1.6 

44.3 

North  Carolina  

.2 

.8 

.3 

.5 

24.2 

.1 

1.9 

28.0 

Illinois  

1.2 

12.1 

12.8 

.5 

.9 

27.5 

South  Dakota  

8.9 

9.2 

1.6 

7.6 

.1 

27.4 

Colorado  

14.4 

4.1 

2.6 

5.9 

27.0 

Montana   

16.7 

.1 

5.0 

2.2 

24.0 

Oklahoma  

15.7 

.2 

.1 

2.7 

3.3 

22.0 

Kentucky.   

.1 

.4 

15.9 

.1 

.3 

16.8 

Missouri   

1.8 

4.7 

5.2 

1.4 

.3 

.1 

.7 

14.2 

South  Carolina  

.1 

.6 

1.1 

1.7 

6.4 

.1 

2.3 

12.3 

Idaho    

2.6 

.1 
.  1 

1.2 

7.6 

11.5 

California  

.2 

.5 

1.8 

8.5 

11.1 

Indiana  

.9 

3.8 

4.7 

.4 

.3 

.7 

10.8 

Other  States  

8.4 

7.8 

7.6 

18.3 

17.9 

15.1 

20.4 

95.5 

Total   

172.0 

123.5 

91.0 

74.2 

65.1 

86.6 

67.4 

680.0 

1  1973  production  and  price  levels. 

2  Coarse  grains:  Barley,  rye,  oats,  sorghum. 

Source:  "National  Hail  Research  Experiment"  from  Boone  (1974). 


A  major  characteristic  of  hail  is  its  enormous  variability  in  time, 
space,  and  size.  Some  measure  of  this  great  variability  is  seen  in  figure 
7,  which  shows  the  average  annual  number  of  days  with  hail  at  points 
within  the  continental  United  States.  The  contours  enclose  points  with 
equal  frequency  of  hail  days.67 


00  Chanson,  Stanley  A..  Jr..  Ray  Jay  Davis,  Barbara  C.  Farhar.  J.  Eupene  Haas,  J. 
Lorena  Ivens.  Marvin  V.  Jones,  Donald  A.  Klein,  Dean  Mann.  Griffith  M.  Morgan.  Jr..  Steven 
T.  Sonka.  Earl  R.  Swanson.  C.  Robert  Taylor,  and  Jon  Van  Blokland.  "Hail  Suppression  : 
Impacts  and  Issues."  Final  report — "-Technology  Assessment  of  the  Suppression  of  Hail 
fTASH ) ."  Urbana,  111..  Illinois  State  Water  Survey.  April  lt>77  (sponsored  by  the  National 
Science  Foundation,  Research  Applied  to  National  Needs  Program),  p.  9. 

«  Ibid. 


85 


Hail  forms  in  the  more  active  convective  clouds,  with  large  vertical 
motions,  where  large  quantities  of  water  vapor  condense  under  condi- 
tions in  which  large  ice  particles  can  grow  quickly.  The  kinds  of  con- 
vective clouds  from  which  hail  can  be  formed  include  (1)  supercells 
(large,  quasi-steady-state,  convective  storms,  (2)  multicell  storms 
(active  convective  storms  with  multiple  cells),  (3)  organized  convec- 
tive storms  of  squall  lines  or  fronts,  and  (4)  unstable,  highly  convective 
small  cumuli  (primarily  occurring  in  spring). 68  While  hail  generally 
occurs  only  in  thunderstorms,  yet  only  a  small  proportion  of  the  world's 
thunderstorms  produce  an  appreciable  amount  of  hail.  Based  upon  sev- 
eral related  theories,  the  following  desciption  of  the  formation  of  hail 
is  typical : 

Ice  crystals  or  snowflakes,  or  clumps  of  snowflakes,  which  form  above  the 
zone  of  freezing  during  a  thunderstorm,  fall  through  a  stratum  of  supercooled 
water  droplets  (that  is,  water  droplets  well  below  0°  O).  The  contact  of  the  ice 
or  snow  particles  with  the  supercooled  water  droplets  causes  a  film  of  ice  to  form 
on  the  snow  or  ice  pellet.  The  pellet  may  continue  to  fall  a  considerable  distance 
before  it  is  carried  up  again  by  a  strong  vertical  current  into  the  stratum  of 
supercooled  water  droplets  where  another  film  of  water  covers  it.  This  process 
may  be  repeated  many  times  until  the  pellet  can  no  longer  be  supported  by  the 
convective  updraft  and  falls  to  the  ground  as  hail.69 


(  Note:  The  lines  enclose  points  (stations)  that  have  equal  frequency  of  hail  days  ) 


Figure  7. — Average  annual  number  of  days  with  hail  at  a  point,  for  the  contiguous 
United  States.  (From  Changnon,  et  al.,  TASH,  1977.) 


68  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  "Climate  and  Food  ;  Climatic  Fluctuation  and  U.S. 
Agricultural  Production."  1976.  p.  141. 

89  Koeppe.  Clarence  E.  and  George  C.  de  Long,  "Weather  and  Climate,"  New  York,  Mc- 
Graw-Hill, 1958,  pp.  79-80. 


86 


Modification  of  hail 

According  to  D.  Ray  Booker,  "Hail  modification  seeding  has  been 
done  operationally  for  decades  in  the  high  plains  of  the  United  States 
and  in  other  hail  prone  areas  of  the  world.  Thus,  there  appears  to  be  a 
significant  market  for  a  hail-reduction  technology."  70  In  the  United 
States  most  attempts  at  hail  suppression  are  conducted  by  commercial 
seeders  who  are  under  contract  to  State  and  county  governments  and  to 
community  associations.  There  are  also  extensive  hail  suppression  op- 
erations underway  in  foreign  countries.  Although  some  successes  are 
reported,  many  important  questions  are  still  unanswered  with  regard 
to  mitigation  of  hail  effects,  owing  largely  to  lack  of  a  satisfactory 
scheme  for  evaluation  of  results  from  these  projects. 

In  theory,  it  should  be  possible  to  inhibit  the  formation  of  large 
ice  particles  which  constitute  hailstones  by  seeding  in  order  to  increase 
the  number  of  freezing  nuclei  so  that  only  smaller  ice  particles  will 
develop.  This  would  then  leave  the  cloud  with  insufficient  precipita- 
tion water  to  allow  the  accretion  of  supercooled  droplets  and  the 
formation  of  hail  of  damaging  size.  This  simplistic  rationale,  how- 
ever, does  not  provide  insight  into  the  many  complications  with 
which  artificial  nail  suppression  is  fraught ;  nor  does  it  explain  the 
seemingly  capricious  responses  of  hailstorms  to  seeding  and  the  incon- 
sistent results  which  characterize  such  modification  attempts.  As  with 
all  convective  systems,  the  processes  involved  are  very  complex.  They 
are  controlled  by  the  speed  of  movement  of  the  air  parcels  and  precipi- 
tation particles,  leading  to  complicated  particle  growth,  evaporation, 
and  settling  processes.71  As  a  result,  according  to  Changnon,  the  con- 
clusions from  various  hail  suppression  programs  are  less  certain  than 
from  those  for  attempts  to  enhance  rain  from  convective  clouds,  and 
they  are  best  labeled  "contradictory."  72 

Changnon  identifies  two  basic  approaches  that  have  been  taken 
toward  hail  modification : 

»Most  common  has  been  the  intensive,  high  rates  of  seeding  of  the  potential 
storm  with  silver  iodide  in  an  attempt  to  transform  nearly  all  of  the  super- 
cooled water  into  ice  crystals,  or  to  "glaciate"  the  upper  portion  of  the  clouds. 
However,  if  only  part  of  the  supercooled  water  is  transformed  into  ice,  the 
storm  could  actually  be  worsened  since  growth  by  accretion  is  especially  rapid 
in  an  environment  composed  of  a  mixture  of  supercooled  drops  and  ice  crystals. 
Importantly,  to  be  successful,  this  frequently  used  approach  requires  massive 
seeding  well  in  advance  of  the  first  hailstone  formation. 

The  second  major  approach  has  been  used  in  the  Soviet  Union  and  *  *  *  in  the 
National  Hail  Research  Experiment  in  Colorado.  It  involves  massive  seeding 
with  silver  iodide,  but  only  in  the  zone  of  maximum  liquid  water  content  of  the 
cloud.  The  hope  is  to  create  many  hailstone  embryos  so  that  there  will  be  in- 
sufficient supercooled  water  available  to  enable  growth  to  damaging  stone  sizes." 


70  Booker,  D.  Ray,  "A  Marketing  Approach  to  Weather  Modification,"  background  paper 
prepared  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board. 
Feb.  20,  1977.  p.  4. 

i  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  "Climate  and  Food;  Climatic  Fluctuation  and  U.S. 
Agricultural  Production."  1070.  p.  143. 

72  Changnon,  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification ;  Regional  Issues,"  1975, 
p.  102. 

™ Ibid. 


87 


Precipitation  instrument  site,  including,  from  left  to  right,  hailcube,  anemom- 
eter, rain/hail  separator,  and  Belfort  weighing  precipitation  gage.  (Courtesy  of 
the  National  Science  Foundation. ) 

Hail  seeding  technologies 

The  most  significant  field  programs  in  hail  suppression  during  recent 
years  have  included  those  conducted  in  the  Soviet  Union,  in  Alberta, 
in  South  Africa,  and  in  northeastern  Colorado  (the  National  Hail 
Research  Experiment).  In  the  course  of  each  of  these  projects,  some 
of  which  are  still  underway,  various  procedural  changes  have  been 
initiated.  In  all  of  them,  except  that  in  South  Africa,  the  suppression 
techniques  are  based  on  increasing  the  number  of  hail  embryos  by 


88 


seeding  the  cloud  with  ice  nuclei.  Usually,  the  seeding  material  is 
silver  iodide,  but  the  Russians  also  use  lead  iodide,  and  on  occasion 
other  agents  such  as  sodium  chloride  and  copper  sulfate  have  been 
used.  The  essential  problems  in  seeding  for  hail  suppression  are  re- 
lated to  how,  when,  and  where  to  get  the  seeding  agent  into  potential 
hail  clouds  and  how  to  identify  such  clouds.74 

Soviet  suppression  techniques  are  based  on  their  hypothesis  that 
rapid  hail  growth  occurs  in  the  "accumulation  zone,"  just  above  the 
level  of  maximum  updraft,  where  liquid  water  content  can  be  as 
great  as  40  grams  per  cubic  meter.  To  get  significant  hail,  the  maximum 
updraft  should  exceed  10  to  15  meters  per  second,  and  the  temperature 
in  this  zone  must  be  between  0  and  —25°  C.  Upper  large  droplets 
freeze  and  grow,  combining  with  lower  large  droplets,  and  an  increase 
in  particle  size  from  0.1  cm  to  2  or  3  cm  can  occur  in  only  4  to  5  minutes. 
In  the  several  Russian  projects,  the  seeding  agent  is  introduced  at 
selected  cloud  heights  from  rockets  or  antiaircraft  shells ;  the  number 
of  volleys  required  and  the  position  of  injection  being  determined  by 
radar  echo  characteristics  and  past  experience  in  a  given  operational 
region.75 

In  other  hail  suppression  projects,  seeding  is  most  frequently  carried 
out  with  aircraft,  from  which  flares  containing  the  seeding  agent  are 
released  by  ejection  or  dropping.  Each  flare  may  contain  up  to  100 
grams  of  silver  iodide ;  and  the  number  used  as  well  as  the  spacing  and 
height  of  ignition  are  determined  from  cloud  characteristics  as  well  as 
past  experience  in  a  given  experiment  or  operation.  In  each  case  it 
is  intended  to  inject  the  seeding  material  into  the  supercooled  portion 
of  the  cloud. 

Evaluation  of  hail  suppression  technology 

It  appears  that  mitigation  of  the  effects  of  hail  has  some  promise, 
based  on  the  collection  of  total  evidence  from  experiments  and  opera- 
tions around  the  world.  In  the  Soviet  Union,  scientists  have  been 
reporting  spectacular  success  (claims  of  60  to  80  percent  reduction)76 
in  hail  suppression  for  nearly  15  years;  however,  their  claims  are  not 
universally  accepted,  since  there  has  not  been  careful  evaluation  under 
controlled  conditions.  Hail-seeding  experiments  have  had  mixed  results 
in  other  parts  of  the  world,  although  a  number  of  commercial  seeders 
have  claimed  success  in  hail  damage  reduction,  but  not  with  convincing 
evidence.77 

Successful  hail  suppression  reports  have  come  from  a  number  of 
operational  programs  in  the  United  States  as  well  as  from  weather 
modification  activities  in  the  Soviet  Union  and  in  South  Africa.  Often 
the  validity  of  these  results  is  questionable  in  view  of  deficiencies  in 
project  design  and  data  analysis;  nevertheless,  the  cumulative  evidence 
suggests  that  hail  suppression  is  feasible  under  certain  conditions. 
There  are  also  reports  of  negative  results,  for  example,  in  foreign  pro- 
grams and  in  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  in  the  United 


7*Chan*rnon.  Stanlev  A..  Jr..  and  Griffith  M.  Moroni.  Jr..  "Desipn  of  an  Experiment  To 
Suppress  Hail  In  Illinois."  Illinois  State  Water  Survey.  TSWS/R  01  /7fi.  RnHetln  01.  State  ot 
Illinois.  Department  of  Registration  and  Education,  Urbana,  1970.  pp.  82-S3. 

75  Ibid.,  p.  S3. 

70  Chancrnon.  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification,"  107".  p  102. 

77  Rattan.  Louis  J.  statement  submitted  to  Subcommittee  on  Environment  and  Atmos- 
phere Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  U.S.  House  of  Representatives,  at  hearings. 
June  18,  1970,  pp.  7-8. 


89 


States,  which  indicate  that  under  some  conditions  seeding  induces 
increased  hail.78 

Atlas  notes  that  this  apparent  dichotomy  has  until  recently  been 
attributed  to  different  approaches  to  the  techniques  and  rates  of  seed- 
ing. However,  lie  observes  that  both  positive  and  negative  results 
have  been  obtained  using  a  variety  of  seeding  methods,  including 
ground-  and  cloud-based  generators,  flares  dropped  from  above  the 
cloud  top,  and  injection  by  rockets  and  artillery.79  In  discussing  the 
reasons  for  increased  hail  upon  seeding,  Atlas  states : 

There  are  at  least  four  physical  mechanisms  by  which  seeding  may  produce 
increased  hail.  Two  of  these  occur  in  situations  in  which  the  rate  of  supply  of 
supercooled  water  exceeds  that  which  can  be  effectively  depleted  by  the  com- 
bination of  natural  and  artificially  produced  hail  embryos.  This  may  occur  in 
supercell  storms  and  in  any  cold-base  storm  in  which  the  embryos  are  graupel 
rather  than  frozen  raindrops.  Moreover,  present  seeding  methods  are  much  more 
effective  in  warm-base  situations  in  which  the  hail  embryos  are  frozen  raindrops. 
Increased  hail  is  also  probable  when  partial  glaciation  of  a  cloud  is  produced 
and  the  hail  can  grow  more  effectively  upon  the  ice-water  mixture  than  upon 
the  supercooled  water  alone.  Similarly,  increases  in  the  amount  of  hail  may 
occur  whenever  the  additional  latent  heat  resulting  from  nucleation  alters  the 
undraft  profile  in  such  a  manner  as  to  increase  its  maximum  velocity  or  to 
shift  the  peak  velocity  into  the  temperature  range  from  —20°  to  —30°  C,  where 
the  accreted  water  can  be  more  readily  frozen.  A  probable  associated  effect  is 
the  redistribution  of  precipitation  loading  by  the  combination  of  an  alternation 
in  the  updraft  velocity  and  the  particle  sizes  such  that  the  hail  embroyos  may 
grow  for  longer  durations  in  a  more  favorable  growth  environment.80 

Surreys  of  hail  suppression  effectiveness 

Recently,  Changnon  collected  information  on  the  effectiveness  of 
hail  suppression  technology  from  three  different  kinds  of  sources.  One 
set  of  data  was  based  on  the  results  of  the  evaluations  of  six  hail  sup- 
pression projects;  another  was  the  collection  of  the  findings  of  three 
published  assessments  of  hail  modification ;  and  the  third  was  obtained 
from  two  opinion  surveys  conducted  among  weather  modification 
scientists.81  The  principal  statistics  on  the  estimated  capabilities  for 
hail  suppression  from  each  of  these  groups  of  sources  are  summarized 
in  table  7.  Where  available,  the  estimated  change  in  rainfall  accom- 
panying the  hail  modification  estimates  are  also  included.  Such  rain- 
fall changes  might  have  been  sought  intentionally  as  part  of  a  hail  sup- 
pression activity  or  might  result  simply  as  a  byproduct  of  the  major 
thrust  in  reducing  hail.  In  the  table,  a  plus  sign* indicates  an  estimated 
percentage  increase  in  hail  and/or  rainfall  while  a  minus  sign  signifies 
a  percentage  decrease. 

The  six  evaluations  in  part  A  of  table  7  are  from  both  experimental 
and  operational  projects,  each  of  which  was  conducted  for  at  least  3 
years  in  a  single  locale  and  in  each  of  which  aircraft  seeding  tech- 
niques were  used.  Thus,  the  results  of  a  number  of  earlier  experiments, 
using  ground-based  seeding  generators,  were  not  considered  in  the 
estimations.  Furthermore,  change  in  hail  due  to  suppression  activities 
was  defined  on  the  basis  of  crop-loss  statistics  rather  than  on  the  basis 
of  frequency  of  hail  days,  since  Changnon  does  not  consider  the  latter, 


7S  Atlas.  David,  "The  Paradox  of  Hail  Suppression,"  Science,  vol.  195,  No.  4274,  Jan.  14. 
1977.  p.  195. 
79  Ibid. 

60  Ibid.,  pp  195-196. 

81  Chanjrnon.  Stanlev  A..  Jr..  "On  tbe  Status  of  Hail  Suppression."  Bulletin  of  the  Amer- 
ican Meteorological  Society,  vol.  58,  No.  1,  Jan.  1977,  pp.  20-28. 


90 


along  with  other  criteria  such  as  number  and  size  of  hailstones,  hail 
mass,  and  radar  echo  characteristics,  to  be  a  reliable  indicator.82  Note 
that  five  of  the  six  projects  listed  indicate  a  hail  suppression  capability 
ranging  from  20  percent  to  48  percent.  Changnon  notes,  however,  that 
most  of  these  results  are  not  statistically  significant  at  the  5  percent 
level,  but  that  most  scientists  would  classify  the  results  as  "opti- 
mistic." 83 

Table  7— Status  of  Hail  Suppression  and  Related  Rainfall  Modification 
(Based  on  information  from  Changnon.  On  the  Status  of  Hail  Suppression. 
1977.) 

A.  BEST  ESTIMATES  FROM  PROJECT  EVALUATIONS 

1.  Texas:  Hail  modification  was  —48  percent  (crop-loss  cost  value)  ;  no  change 
in  rainfall. 

2.  Southwestern  North  Dakota :  Hail  modification  was  —32  percent  (crop-hail 
insurance  rates)  ;  no  rain  change  information  available. 

3.  North  Dakota  pilot  project :  Hail  modification  was  —30  percent  (a  composite 
of  hail  characteristics,  radar,  and  crop-loss  data)  ;  change  in  rainfall  was  +23 
percent. 

4.  South  Africa :  Hail  modification  was  —40  percent  (crop-loss  severity ; 
change  in  rainfall  was  —4  percent. 

5.  South  Dakota  "Statewide"  project :  Hail  modification  was  —20  percent 
(crop  loss)  ;  increase  in  rainfall  was  +?  percent. 

6.  National  hail  research  experiment  in  Colorado  : 

Increase  in  hail  mass  was  +4  percent  to  +23  percent,  with  median  of 
+23  percent : 
Increase  in  rainfall  was  +25  percent. 

B.  PUBLISHED  ASSESSMENTS 

1.  American  Meteorological  Society :  Positive  but  unsubstantiated  claims  and 
growing  optimism. 

2.  National  Academy  of  Sciences:  30  to  50  percent  reductions  in  U.S.S.R.  and 
15  percent  decreases  in  France — neither  result  proven  by  experimentation. 

3.  Colorado  State  University  Workshop : 

—30  percent  modification  nationwide ; 

—30  percent  modification  in  the  High  Plains,  with  ±  10-percent  change  in 
rain ;  unknown  results  in  the  Midwest ;  also  unknown  rainfall  effects. 

C.  OPINION  SURVEYS  ('MEDIAN  VALUES; 

1.  Farhar-Grant  questionnaire  (214  answers)  :  —25  percent  crop-hail  damage 
nationwide,  although  majority — 59  percent — admit  they  do  not  know. 

2.  Illinois  State  Water  Survey  questionnaire  (63  answers)  : 

—30  percent  hail  loss,  with  +15  percent  rain  increasein  the  Great  Plains: 
—20  percent  hail  loss,  with  +10  percent  rain  increase  in  the  Midwest. 

The  results,  shown  in  part  B  of  table  7,  from  the  recent  published 
assessments  of  capability  in  hail  suppression  reveal  a  position  of 
"guarded  optimism;"  however,  there  is  no  indication  of  definitive 
proof  of  hail  suppression  contained  in  those  assessments.84  These  pub- 
lished assessments  are  comprised  of  a  statement,  on  the  status  of 
weather  modification  by  the  American  Meteorological  Society,85  the 
conclusions  of  a  study  on  the  progress  of  weather  modification  by  the 

82  Ibid.,  p.  22. 
*»Th1rt..  p.  26. 
"*  Ibid. 

"  American  Meteorological  Society.  "Policy  Statement  of  tbo  American  Meteorological 
Rocietv  on  Purposeful  and  Inadvertent  Modifier  Hon  of  Woatbcr  nnd  Climate,"  Bulletin  of 
tbo  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  ,r)4.  No.  7,  July  1073.  pp.  694-695. 


91 


National  Academy  of  Sciences,86  and  a  report  on  a  workshop  at  Colo- 
rado State  University  on  weather  modification  and  'agriculture.87 

The  third  view  (part  C,  table  7)  resulting  from  two  opinion  surveys, 
indicates  wide-ranging  but  basically  "bipolar"  attitudes  among  the 
scientists  surveyed.  The  majority  of  the  experts  queried  felt  that  a  hail 
suppression  capability  could  not  be  identified;  however,  a  sizable 
minority  were  of  the  opinion  that  a  moderate  capability  for  modifying 
hail  (greater  than  20-percent  decrease)  does  now  exist.  Changnon  says 
that  the  results  of  these  opinion  surveys  show  at  best  that  the  con- 
sensus must  be  considered  to  be  a  pessimistic  view  of  a  hail  suppres- 
sion capability.88 

In  his  conclusions  on  the  status  of  hail  suppression  technology, 
Changnon  states : 

These  three  views  of  the  current  status  of  hail  suppression,  labeled  as  (1)  opti- 
mistic, (2)  slightly  optimistic,  and  (3)  pessimistic,  reflect  a  wide  range  of  opin- 
ion and  results.  Clearly,  the  present  status  of  hail  suppression  is  in  a  state  of 
uncertainty.  Reviews  of  the  existing  results  from  6  recent  operational  and  ex- 
perimental hail  suppression  projects  are  sufficiently  suggestive  of  a  hail  sup- 
pression capability  in  the  range  of  20  to  50  percent  to  suggest  the  need  for  an 
extensive  investigation  by  an  august  body  of  the  hail  suppression  capability 
exhibited  in  these  and  other  programs. 

One  of  the  necessary  steps  in  the  wise  experimentation  and  future  use  of  hail 
suppression  in  the  United  States  is  to  cast  the  current  status  in  a  proper  light. 
This  can  only  be  accomplished  by  a  vigorous  in-depth  study  and  evaluation  of 
the  results  of  the  recent  projects.88 

Conclusions  from  the  TASH  study 

Sponsored  by  the  Eesearch  Applied  to  National  Needs  program  of 
the  National  Science  Foundation,  a  major  technology  assessment  of 
hail  suppression  in  the  United  States  was  conducted  from  1975  through 
1977,  by  an  interdisciplinary  research  team.90  This  Technology  Assess- 
ment of  the  Suppression  of  Hail  (TASH)  study  was  intended  to  bring 
together  all  of  the  considerations  involved  in  the  application  of  hail 
suppression,  in  the  present  and  in  the  future,  to  ascertain  the  net  value 
of  such  technology  to  society.  The  goals  of  the  study  were : 

To  describe  the  current  knowledge  of  hail  suppression. 
To  identify  long-range  expectations  for  such  a  technology. 
To  estimate  the  societal  impacts  that  might  be  generated  by  its  wide  use. 
To  examine  public  policy  actions  that  would  most  equitably  direct  its  beneficial 
use. 

From  its  interdisciplinary  study  of  hail  suppression  and  its  impacts 
the  TASH  team  reached  the  following  broad  conclusions  on  the  effects 
of  hail  and  on  the  potential  technology  for  suppression  of  hail : 

The  United  States  experiences  about  $850  million  in  direct  crop  and  property 
hail  losses  each  year,  not  including  secondary  losses  from  hail.  The  key  character- 
istic of  hail  is  its  enormous  variability  in  size,  time,  and  space. 

Among  the  alternative  ways  of  dealing  with  the  hail  problem,  including  crop 
insurance,  hail  suppression,  given  a  high  level  of  development,  appears  to  be  the 
most  promising  future  approach  in  high  hail  loss  areas.  Economic  benefits  from 
effective  hail  suppression  vary  by  region  of  the  country,  with  the  most  benefit  to 

66  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences.  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  Washington,  D.C., 
1973.  pp.  100-106. 

87  Grant  and  Reid,  "Workshop  for  an  Assessment  of  the  Present  and  Potential  Role  of 
Weather  Modification  in  Agriculture  Production."  1975.  pp.  33-45. 

88  Changnon.  "On  the  Status  of  Hail  Suppression,"  1977,  p.  26. 
68  Ibid.,  pp.  26-27. 

90  Changnon.  et  al..  "Hail  Suppression  ;  Impacts  and  Issues."  Technology  Assessment  of 
the  Suppression  of  Hail  (TASH) ,  1977,  432  pp. 


92 


be  derived  in  the  Great  Plains  area.  Any  alterations  in  rainfall  resulting  from 
hail  suppression  would  importantly  affect  its  economic  consequences. 

The  effects  of  cloud  seeding  on  rainfall  are  more  significant  than  its  effects  on 
hail  from  economic  and  societal  standpoints. 

At  the  present  time  there  is  no  established  hail  suppression  technology.  It  may 
be  possible  to  reduce  damaging  hail  about  25  percent  over  the  growing  season  in  a 
properly  conducted  project. 

Reducing  the  scientific  uncertainties  about  hail  suppression  will  require  a  sub- 
stantial commitment  by  the  Federal  Government  for  long-term  funding  of  a  sys- 
tematic, well-designed  program  of  research.  For  the  next  decade  or  so,  monitoring 
and  evaluation  of  operational  programs  will  be  important. 

Benefit-cost  analysis  revealed  that  investment  in  development  of  the  high-level 
technology  would  result  in  a  ratio  of  14 :1,  with  the  present  value  of  benefits  esti- 
mated to  total  $2.8  billion  for  20  years.  The  low-level  technology  showed  a  nega- 
tive benefit-cost  ratio.  Research  and  development  to  provide  the  high-level 
technology  is  the  best  choice  from  an  economic  standpoint;  a  minimal  level  of 
support  would  be  nonbeneficial.  In  a  word,  if  we  are  going  to  develop  hail  suppres- 
sion technology,  we  would  need  to  do  it  right. 

Effective  hail  suppression  will,  because  of  the  hail  hazard,  technological 
approach,  patterns  of  adoption,  and  institutional  arrangements,  lead  to  regionally 
coherent  programs  that  embrace  groups  of  States,  largely  in  the  Great  Plains. 

Some  would  gain  and  others  would  lose  from  widespread  application  of  an 
effective  hail  suppression  technology.  Farmers  within  adopting  regions  would 
receive  immediate  benefits  from  increased  production.  After  several  years  this 
economic  advantage  would  be  diminished  somewhat,  but  increased  stability  of 
income  would  remain.  Farmers  growing  the  same  crops  outside  the  adopting  areas 
would  have  no  advantages  and  would  be  economically  disadvantaged  by  commod- 
ity prices  lower  than  they  would  have  been  with  no  hail  suppression.  The  price 
depressing  effects  result  from  increased  production  in  adopting  areas.  Consumers 
would  benefit  from  slightly  decreased  food  prices.  The  impacts  generated  by  a 
highly  effective  technology  include  both  positive  and  negative  outcomes  for  vari- 
ous other  stake-holder  groups  in  the  Nation.  For  the  Nation  as  a  whole,  the 
impacts  would  be  minor  and  beneficial.  On  balance,  the  positive  impacts  outweigh 
the  negative  impacts  if  a  high-level  technology  can  be  developed. 

An  adequate  means  of  providing  equitable  compensation  on  an  economically 
sound  basis  for  persons  suffering  from  losses  due  to  cloud  seeding  has  not  been 
developed.  Some  better  procedure  for  compensating  losers  will  be  necessary.  In 
addition,  present  decision  mechanisms  and  institutional  arrangements  are  inade- 
quate to  implement  the  technology  in  a  socially  acceptable  manner.  Some  mecha- 
nism for  including  potential  opponents  in  the  decisionmaking  process  will  be 
required. 

It  is  unlikely  that  widespread  operational  hail  suppression  programs  would 
have  serious  adverse  environmental  impacts,  although  lack  of  sufficient  knowledge 
indicates  that  adverse  impacts  should  not  be  ruled  out.  Long-term  environmental 
effects  are  not  known  at  the  present  time.91 

DISSIPATION  OF  FOG  AND  STRATUS  CLOUDS 

Fog  poses  a  hazard  to  man's  transportation  activities,  particularly 
to  aviation,  where  as  a  result  of  delays  air  carriers  lose  over  $80  million 
annually.  Highway  accidents  attributed  to  fog  are  estimated  to  cost 
over  $300  million  per  year.92  Most  often  the  impetus  to  develop  effec- 
tive fog  and  stratus  cloud  dispersal  capabilities  has  come  from  the 
needs  of  commercial  and  military  aircraft  operations. 

There  are  two  basic  kinds  of  fog,  and  the  suppression  of  each  re- 
quires a  different  approach.  Supercooled  fog  and  stratus  clouds  are 
comprised  of  liquid  water  droplets  whose  temperature  is  below  f  reez- 

81  Farhar.  Barbara  C,  Stanley  A.  Changnon,  Jr.,  Earl  R.  Swanson,  Ray  J.  Davis,  and 
J  Eugene  Haas.  "Hail  Suppression  and  Societv.  Summary  of  Technology  Assessment  of  Hail 
Suppression,"  Urbana.  111..  "Illinois  State  Water  Survey,  June  1977."  pp.  21-22.  (This 
document  is  an  executive  summary  of  the  technology  assessment  by  Changnon,  et  al.,  "Hail 
Suppression  ;  Impacts  and  Issues.") 

92  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  "Summary  Report :  Weather  Modi- 
fication ;  Fiscal  Years  1969,  1970,  1971,"  Rockville,  Md.,  May  1973,  p.  72. 


93 


ing  (i.e.,  0°  C  or  below).  Supercooled  fogs  account  for  only  about  5 
percent  of  all  fog  occurrences  in  the  United  States,  although  they  are 
prevalent  in  certain  parts  of  northeastern  and  northwestern  North 
America.  The  remainder  of  North  American  fogs  are  warm  fogs  (water 
droplets  warmer  than  0°  C).93  Although  cold  fog  has  been  amenable 
to  modification,  so  that  there  essentially  exists  an  operational  tech- 
nology for  its  dissipation,  practical  modification  of  warm  fogs,  on  an 
economical  basis,  has  not  yet  been  achieved. 

Cold  fog  modification 

Dispersal  of  cold  fog  by  airborne  or  ground-based  techniques  has 
been  generally  successful  and  has  become  an  operational  weather  modi- 
fication technology.  In  the  United  States  cold  fog  dispersal  operations 
have  been  conducted,  for  example,  by  commercial  airlines,  usually  with 
dry  ice  as  the  seeding  agent.  The  U.S.  Air  Force  has  also  operated 
ground-based  liquid  propane  systems,  at  domestic  and  foreign  bases, 
which  have  been  effective  in  dissipating  cold  fog  over  runways,  thus 
reducing  flight  delays  and  diversions.94  Conducted  largely  at  airports, 
cold  fog  suppression  is  usually  accomplished  using  aircraft,  which  drop 
various  freezing  agents,  such  as  dry  ice  or  silver  iodide  as  they  fly  over 
the  fog-covered  runways.  The  agents  initiate  ice  crystal  formation  and 
lead  to  precipitation  of  the  growing  crystals.95  Ground-based  systems 
for  cold  fog  dispersal  have  also  been  used  and  have  some  advantages 
over  airborne  systems.  Such  a  system  can  operate  continuously  for  ex- 
tended time  periods  more  economically  and  more  reliably. 

Warm  fog  modification 

The  remainder  of  North  American  fogs  are  "warm  fogs"  for  which 
a  suitable  dispersal  capability  remains  to  be  developed.  Crutchfield 
summarizes  the  status  of  warm  fog  dispersal  technology  and  its  eco- 
nomic potential : 

The  much  more  extensive  warm  fogs  which  cause  delays,  accidents,  and  costly 
interruptions  to  every  type  of  transportation  have  proved  intractable  to  weather 
modification  thus  far.  Some  success  has  been  achieved  on  occasion  by  heavy 
seeding  with  salt  and  other  materials,  but  results  have  not  been  uniformly  good, 
and  the  materials  used  have  presented  environmental  problems  in  the  areas 
treated.  Heating  airport  runways  has  been  of  some  benefit  in  dealing  with  warm 
fog,  but  at  present  is  not  generally  effective  in  cost-benefit  terms  and  can  inter- 
rupt air  traffic. 

Nevertheless,  the  research  and  technology  problems  involved  in  the  dispersal 
of  warm  fog  appear  to  be  of  manageable  proportions,  and  the  benefits  from  an 
environmentally  acceptable  and  predictable  technique  for  dealing  with  warm 
fog  would  be  of  very  real  interest  in  terms  of  economic  gain.96 

A  number  of  field  techniques  have  been  attempted,  with  some  meas- 
ure of  success,  for  artificial  modification  of  warm  fogs.  Seeding  is 
one  technique,  where  the  seeding  agents  are  usually  hygroscopic  parti- 
cles, solution  drops,  or  both.  There  are  two  possible  desired  effects  of 
seeding  warm  fogs,  one  being  the  evaporation  of  fog  droplets,  resulting 
in  visibility  improvement.  A  second  desired  effect  of  seeding,  results 
from  the  "coalescence"  process,  in  which  the  solution  droplets,  falling 

93  Changnon,  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification,"  1975,  p.  165. 

94  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  "Summary  Report :  Weather  Modi- 
fication ;  Fiscal  Year  1973."  Rockville,  Md.,  December  1974,  pp.  39-40. 

9a  Changnon.  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification,"  1975.  p.  165. 

98  Crutchfield,  James  A.,  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential."  Paper  prepared 
for  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  University  of 
Washington,  Seattle,  May  1977,  pp.  5-6. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  9 


94 


through  the  fog  layer,  collect  the  smaller  fog  droplets,  increasing 
visibility  as  the  fog  particles  are  removed  in  the  fallout.97  There  is  a 
wide  diversity  of  hygroscopic  particles  which  can  and  have  been  used 
for  warm  fog  dissipation.  Sodium  chloride  and  urea  are  the  most 
common,  but  others  have  included  polyelectrolyte  chemicals,  an  ex- 
ceedingly hygroscopic  solution  of  ammonium-nitrate  urea,  and  some 
biodegradable  chemicals.  Seeding  particle  size  is  critical  to  the  effec- 
tiveness of  a  warm  fog  dispersal  attempt ;  it  has  been  found  that  poly- 
dispersed  particles  (i.e.,  material  with  a  distribution  of  particle  sizes) 
are  more  effective  in  inducing  fog  modification  than  are  extra  fine 
particles  of  uniform  size,  which  were  only  thought  to  be  optimum  in 
earlier  experiments.  Other  problems  which  are  the  subject  of  con- 
tinuing study  relate  to  the  seeding  procedures,  including  the  number 
of  flights,  number  of  aircraft  to  be  used,  and  flight  patterns  in 
accordance  with  the  local  terrain  and  wind  conditions.  One  of  the 
most  difficult  operational  problems  in  the  seeding  of  warm  fog  is  that 
of  targeting.  One  solution  to  this  problem,  suggested  by  the  Air  Force, 
is  the  implementation  of  wide-area  seeding  instead  of  single-line 
seeding,  which  is  so  easily  influenced  by  turbulence  and  wind  shear.98 
Another  technique  for  dissipation  of  warm  fog  makes  use  of  heating. 
The  physical  principle  involved  is  the  vaporization  of  the  water  drop- 
lets through  introduction  of  sufficient  heat  to  vaporize  the  water  and 
also  warm  the  air  to  such  a  temperature  that  it  will  hold  the  additional 
moisture  and  prevent  condensation.  Knowing  the  amount  of  liquid 
water  in  the  atmosphere  from  physical  measurements,  the  necessary 
amount  of  heat  energy  to  be  injected  can  be  determined.99  The  fea- 
sibility of  this  approach  was  first  demonstrated  in  England  during 
World  War  II,  when  it  was  necessary  to  fly  aircraft  in  all  kinds  of 
weather  in  spite  of  frequent  fogbound  conditions  in  the  British  Isles. 
The  acronym  FIDO,  standing  for  Fog  Investigations  Dispersal  Of, 
was  applied  to  a  simple  system  whereby  fuel  oil  in  containers  placed 
along  the  runways  was  ignited  at  times  when  it  was  necessary  to  land 
a  plane  in  the  fog.  Although  burning  as  much  as  6,000  gallons  of  oil 
for  a  single  airplane  landing  was  expensive  and  inefficient,  it  was 
justified  as  a  necessary  weather  modification  technique  during  war- 
time.99* 

Initial  and  subsequent  attempts  to  disperse  fog  by  burning  liquid 
fuel  were  found  to  be  hazardous,  uneconomical,  and  sometimes  in- 
effective, and,  as  a  result,  not  much  was  done  with  this  heating  tech- 
nique until  the  French  revised  it,  developing  the  Turboclair  method 
for  dissipating  fog  by  heating  with  underground  jet  blowers.  After  10 
years  of  development  and  engineering  testing,  the  system  was  tested 
successfully  by  the  Paris  Airport  Authority  at  Orly  Airport.  This 
program  has  given  a  new  interest  and  stimulated  further  research  and 
development  of  this  technique  both  in  the  United  States  and  elsewhere. 
In  the  United  States,  the  Air  Force  conducted  Project  Warm  Fog 
to  test  the  effectiveness  of  heating  to  remove  warm  fog.  It  is  clear  that 
this  method  is  promising;  however,  further  studies  are  needed.1 

97  Mosohnndreas.  Demetrlos  J.,  "Present  Capabilities  to  Modify  Warm  Fog  and  Stratus," 
Geomet.  Inc..  report  No  EF-300.  Technical  report  for  Office  of  Naval  Research  and  Naval 
Air  Svstems  Command,  Rockvllle,  Md.,  Jan,  18,  1974,  p.  13. 

88  Ibid.,  pp.  16-17. 

"  Ibid    pp.  24.  30. 

Halacy,  Daniel  S.,  Jr.,  "The  Weather  Changers,"  New  York,  Harper  and  Row.  1968, 
pp.  105-107. 

1  Moschandreas.  "Present  Capabilities  to  Modify  Warm  Fog  and  Stratus,"  1974,  pp. 


95 


Research  and  development  on  warm  fog  dispersal  systems  has  con- 
tinued under  sponsorship  of  the  U.S.  Air  Force,  using  both  passive 
heat  systems,  and  thermokinetic  systems  which  combine  both  heat  and 
mechanical  thrust.  A  thermokinetic  system,  known  as  the  Warm  Fog 
Dispersal  System  (WFDS),  consists  of  three  components:  The  com- 
bustors,  the  controls,  and  the  fuel  storage  and  distribution  hardware. 
Testing  of  the  WFDS  by  the  Air  Force  is  to  be  conducted  during  late 
1978  and  1979  at  Otis  Air  Force  Base  in  Massachusetts,  after  which  it 
is  to  be  installed  and  operational  at  an  Air  Force  base  by  1982.2  Dis- 
cussion of  the  Air  Force  development  program  and  of  the  concurrent 
studies  and  interest  on  the  Federal  Aviation  Administration  in  this 
thermokinetic  fog  dispersal  system  is  found  in  chapter  5  of  this  report.3 

There  have  been  attempts  to  evaporate  warm  fogs  through  mechani- 
cal mixing  of  the  fog  layer  with  warmer,  drier  air  from  above.  Such 
attempts  have  been  underway  using  the  strong  downwash  from  heli- 
copters ;  however,  such  a  technique  is  very  costly  and  would  likely  be 
employed  only  at  military  installations  where  a  number  of  helicopters 
might  be  available. 

The  helicopters  hover  or  move  slowly  in  the  dry  air  above  the  fog 
layer.  Clear  dry  air  is  moved  downward  into  the  fog  by  the  circulation 
of  the  helicopter  rotors.  The  mixture  of  dry  and  cloudy  air  permits  the 
fog  to  evaporate,  and  in  the  fog  layer  there  is  created  an  opening  whose 
size  and  lifetime  are  determined  by  the  meteorological  conditions  in 
the  area,  by  the  flight  pattern,  and  by  the  kind  of  helicopter. 

Conclusions  reached  by  scientists  involved  in  a  series  of  joint  U.S. 
Air  Force- Army  research  projects  using  helicopters  for  fog  dispersal 
follow : 

The  downwash  method  by  a  single  helicopter  can  clear  zones 
large  enough  for  helicopter  landing  if  the  depth  of  the  fog  is  less 
than  300  feet  (100  meters) . 

Single  or  multiple  helicopters  with  flight  patterns  properly 
orchestrated  can  maintain  continuous  clearings  appropriate  for 
aircraft  takeoff  and  landing  in  fogs  of  less  than  300  feet  (100 
meters)  deep.4 

In  addition  to  the  more  commonly  applied  experimental  techniques, 
such  as  seeding,  heating,  and  mechanical  mixing,  other  attempts  have 
been  made  to  disperse  warm  fogs.  These  have  included  the  injection  of 
ions  or  charged  drops  into  the  fog  and  the  use  of  a  laser  beam  to  clear 
the  fog.  Further  research  is  needed  before  definitive  results  can  be 
cited  using  these  methods.5 

Table  8  is  a  summary  of  research  projects  on  warm  fog  dispersal 
which  had  been  conducted  by  various  organizations  in  the  United 
States  between  1967  and  1973.  Note  that,  in  addition  to  field  experi- 
ments, research  included  modeling,  field  measurements  and  observa- 
tions of  fog,  chamber  tests,  statistical  interpretation,  model  evaluation, 
and  operational  assessment. 

On  the  basis  of  his  study  of  research  projects  through  1973  and 
claims  projected  by  the  scientists  involved  in  the  various  warm  fog 

8  Kunkel.  Bruce  A.,  "The  Design  of  a  Warm  Fog  Dispersal  System."  In  preprints  of  the 
Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification.  Champaign,  111.. 
Oct  10-13.  1977.  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977,  pp.  174-176. 

3  See  pp.  305  and  308. 

4  Moschandreas,  "Present  Capabilities  To  Modify  Warm  Fog  and  Stratus,"  1974,  p.  45. 
6  Ibid.,  p.  14. 


96 


modification  programs,  Demetrios  Moschandreas  formulated  the  fol- 
lowing conclusions  on  warm  fog  dispersal : 

Seeding  with  hygroscopic  particles  has  been  successful;  how- 
ever, targeting  problems  would  require  the  wide-area  approach  to 
seeding.  Urea  has  also  been  projected  as  the  agent  which  is  most 
effective  and  least  harmful  to  the  environment. 

The  heating  technique  is  very  promising  and  very  efficient; 
studies  for  further  verification  of  its  capabilities  are  in  order. 

The  helicopter  technique  by  itself  has  not  been  as  promising  as 
the  combination  of  its  use  with  hygroscopic  seeding. 

Studies  on  the  other  less  often  used  techniques  have  not  reached 
the  stage  of  wide  field  application. 

Numerical  modeling  has  provided  guidelines  to  the  field  experi- 
ments and  insights  to  the  theoretical  studies  of  fog  conditions. 

The  laboratory  experiments  have  given  the  scientists  the  con- 
trolled conditions  necessary  to  validate  a  number  of  theories.  The 
unique  contribution  of  chamber  tests  to  a  better  understanding  of 
the  dynamics  of  fog  formation  has  been  widely  recognized.6 


TABLE  8. — SUMMARY  OF  PRINCIPAL  RESEARCH  RELATIVE  TO  WARM  FOG  DISPERSAL  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES, 

THROUGH  1973  « 

[From  Moschandreas,  1974] 


Area  of  effort 

Year  of  publication 

1967  2 

1968 

1969 

1970 

1971 

1972 

1973 

Modeling  and  numerical  ex- 

NWRF 

CAL 

CAL 

AFCRL 

CAL 

CAL 

AFCRL 

periments. 

AFCRL 

MRI 

MRI 

AFCRL 

GEOMET 

GEOMET 

NWRF 

GEOMET 

GEOMET 

NCAR 

NWC 

EPRF 

Field  measurements;  fog  ob- 

CAL 

CAL 

AFCRL 

CAL 

servations. 

MRI 

MRI 

CAL 

AFCRL 

EG&G 

CAL 

MRI 

FAA 

NWC 

Chamber  tests  

CAL 

CAL 

USNPGS 

CAL 

CAL 

Field  experiments  

CAL 

CAL 

AFCRL 

MRI 

AFCRL 

CAL 

FAA 

EG&G 

MRI 

MRI 

NWC 

Statistical  interpretation 

AFCRL 

Assessment  of  operational 

NWRF 

FAA 

AFCRL 

AFCRL 

Use. 

EG&G 

i  Research  is  listed  by  agency  conducting  the  research,  or  sponsoring  it,  when  reporting  its  contractor's  efforts;  or  by 
contractor's  name  when  contractor's  report  is  principal  reference;  individual  researchers  are  not  listed  because  these 
change,  even  though  the  cont;mjity  of  effort  is  maintained. 

s  Work  reported  prior  to  1967  is  not  included  here. 

Key:  CAL— Cornell  Aeronautical  Laboratory,  Inc.;  AFCRL— Air  Force  Cambridge  Research  Laboratories;  GEOMET— 
GEOMET,  Inc.;  MRI— Meteorology  Research,  Inc.;  NWRF— U.S.  Navy  Weather  Research  Facility;  EPRF— U.S.  Navy  En- 
vironmental Research  Facility;  EG&G— EG&G  Environmental  Services  Ooeration;  FAA— Federal  Aviation  Administra- 
tion: NCAR— National  Center  for  Atomospheric  Research;  NWC— Naval  Weapons  Center;  USNPGS— U.S.  Naval  Postgrad- 
uate School. 

LIGHTNING  SUPPRESSION 

At  any  given  time  over  the  whole  Earth  there  are  about  2,000  thun- 
derstorms in  progress,  and  within  these  storms  about  1,000  cloud-to- 
ground  discharges  are  produced  each  second.7  Lightning  is  essentially 
a  long  electric  spark,  believed  to  be  part  of  the  process  by  which  an 
electric  current  is  conducted  from  the  Earth  to  the  ipnosphere,  though 


-  1H1U.,   pp.   W^— »0.  I,  XT 

7  National  Science  Board.  "Patterns  and  Perspectives  In  Environmental  Science,  Na- 
tional Science  Foundation,  Washington,  D.C..  1972,  p.  157. 


97 


the  origin  of  the  lightning  discharge  is  still  not  fully  understood.  In 
fair  weather  the  atmosphere  conducts  a  current  from  the  positively 
charged  ionosphere  to  the  ground,  which  has  a  negative  charge. 

The  details  of  the  charge-generating  process  within  a  thunderstorm 
are  not  well  understood,  though  theories  have  been  proposed  by  cloud 
physicists.  Probably  a  number  of  mechanisms  operate  together  to  bring 
about  cloud  electrification,  though,  essentially,  the  friction  of  the  air 
on  the  water  droplets  and  ice  crystals  in  the  storm  strips  off  electrons 
which  accumulate  near  the  base  of  cumulonimbus  clouds,  while  posi- 
tive charge  collects  in  the  upper  part.  The  negative  charge  near  the 
cloud  base  induces  a  local  positive  charge  on  the  Earth's  surface  be- 
neath, reversing  the  normal  fair  weather  situation.  When  the  electri- 
cal potential  between  the  cloud  and  ground  becomes  sufficiently  large, 
an  electrical  discharge  occurs,  in  which  electrons  flow  from  the  cloud 
to  the  ground.  In  addition,  there  are  discharges  between  clouds  and 
between  oppositely  charged  portions  of  the  same  cloud. 

In  the  rapid  sequence  of  events  which  comprise  a  lightning  stroke, 
the  initial,  almost  invisible,  flow  of  electrons  downward  from  cloud 
to  Earth,  called  the  leader,  is  met  by  an  upward-moving  current  of 
positive  charges,  establishing  a  conducting  path  of  charged  particles. 
A  return  stroke,  much  larger,  then  rushes  from  the  ground  to  the 
cloud.  All  of  these  events  appear  as  a  single  flash  since  they  occur  in 
about  fifty  microseconds;  however,  while  most  people  perceive  the 
lightning  stroke  as  travelling  from  cloud  to  ground,  it  is  actually  the 
return  stroke  which  provides  the  greatest  flash.8 

In  the  United  States,  lightning  kills  about  200  people  annually,  a 
larger  toll  than  that  caused  by  hurricanes.  Since  1940,  about  7,000 
Americans  have  lost  their  lives  from  lightning  and  related  fires.9  These 
casualties  occur  most  often  singly  or  occasionally  two  at  a  time,  so  that 
they  are  not  nearly  so  newsworthy  as  are  the  multiple  deaths  and 
dramatic  property  damage  associated  with  hurricanes,  tornadoes,  and 
floods.  On  the  other  hand,  a  lightning  problem  affecting  large  areas 
is  the  ignition  of  forest  fires,  some  10,000  of  which  are  reported  each 
year  in  the  United  States,  where  the  problem  is  most  acute  in  the 
Western  States  and  Alaska.10  Such  fires  inflict  damage  on  commercial 
timber,  watersheds,  scenic  beauty,  and  other  resources,  causing  an 
estimated  annual  damage  cost  of  $100  million.11  Other  examples  in 
which  lightning  can  be  especially  dangerous  and  damaging  include 
discharges  to  aircraft  and  spacecraft  and  effects  on  such  activities  as 
fuel  transfer  operations  and  the  handling  of  explosives. 

Because  of  the  relative  isolation  of  personal  accidents  due  to  light- 
ning, the  only  feasible  controls  over  loss  of  life  are  through  implemen- 
tation of  safety  measures  which  prevent  exposure  or  by  protection 
of  relatively  small  areas  and  structures  with  lightning  arresters.  For- 
ested areas,  however,  require  large  area  protection  from  lightning- 
caused  fires  in  order  to  promote  sound  forest  management.  It  is  hoped 

8Anthes.  Richard  A.,  Hans  A.  Panofsky,  John  C.  CaMr,  and  Albert  Rango,  "The  AtmosT 
phere,"  Columbus.  Ohio.  Charles  E.  Merrill.  1975,  p.  174. 

9  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  "Peak  Period  for  Lierhtniner  Nears  ;  NOAA  Lists  Safety 
Rules."  News  Release  NOAA  77-156.  Washington.  DC.  June  19.  1977,  p.  1. 

10  Fuquay.  Donald  M.,  "Lightning  Damage  and  Lightning  Modification  Caused  by  Cloud 
Seeding."  In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  John 
Wiley  &  Sons,  1974,  p.  605. 

"Ibid.,  p.  604. 


98 


that  the  widespread  damage  to  forest  resources  resulting  from  the 
lightning-fire  problem  can  be  alleviated  through  use  of  weather  modi- 
fication techniques. 

Lightning  modification 

General  approaches  to  lightning  suppression  through  weather  mod- 
ification, which  have  been  contemplated  or  have  been  attempted,  in- 
clude : 

Dissipation  of  the  cloud  system  within  which  the  thunderstorm 
originates  or  reduction  of  the  convection  within  the  clouds  so  that 
vigorous  updrafts  and  downdrafts  are  suppressed. 

Reduction  of  the  number  of  cloud-to-ground  discharges,  es- 
pecially during  critical  fire  periods. 

Alteration  of  the  characteristics  of  discharges  which  favor 
forest  fuel  ignition. 

Use  of  other  weather  modification  techniques  to  produce  rains 
to  extinguish  fires  or  to  decrease  the  probability  of  ignition 
through  increase  of  ambient  relative  humidity  and  fuel  moisture. 
Lightning  is  associated  with  convective  clouds;  hence,  the  most 
direct  suppression  method  would  involve  elimination  of  the  clouds 
themselves  or  of  the  convection  within  them.  Removal  of  the  clouds 
would  require  changes  to  gross  properties  such  as  temperature  insta- 
bility and  moisture  content  of  the  air ;  thus,  such  modification  is  not 
technically,  energetically,  or  economically  feasible.  However,  it  might 
be  possible  to  reduce  somewhat  the  convection  within  the  clouds.12 

The  formation  of  convective  clouds  depends  on  the  upward  motion 
of  moist  air  caused  by  thermal  instability  and  the  subsequent  produc- 
tion of  water  through  cooling.  This  condensation  releases  more  heat, 
which,  in  turn,  causes  further  buoyancy  and  rising  of  the  cloud.  At 
these  heights  the  temperature  is  low  enough  that  the  water  can  freeze, 
releasing  more  latent  heat  and  enabling  the  cloud  particles  to  rise 
even  higher.  As  a  result  of  the  presence  of  nuclei  which  are  naturally 
present  in  the  cloud,  glaciation  proceeds  continuously.  Through  arti- 
ficial nucleation,  by  seeding,  natural  glaciation  may  be  reinforced  and 
development  of  the  cloud  assisted.  Rapid,  premature  seeding,  how- 
ever, would  still  promote  buoyancy  but  could  also  introduce  so  much 
turbulence  that  the  cloud  is  unable  to  develop,  because  colder  air  en- 
tering the  cloud  by  turbulent  mixing  would  lower  the  changes  of  the 
cloud  reaching  moderate  altitudes.  Since  there  is  a  high  correlation 
between  cloud  height,  convective  activity,  and  lightning,  such  early 
nucleation  of  a  cloud  should  reduce  the  likelihood  of  intense  elec- 
trical activity.  Seeding  would  be  accomplished  by  releasing  silver 
iodide  into  the  cores  of  growing  cumulus  clouds ;  it  could  be  delivered 
from  ground  dispensers  or  from  aircraft  into  the  updraft  under  the 
cloud  base.  The  amount  of  seeding  material  must  be  chosen  carefully, 
and,  in  order  to  increase  the  chances  for  cloud  dissipation,  overseed- 
ing  is  probably  most  effective,  though  such  overseeding  will  also  tend 
to  reduce  precipitation.  On  the  other  hand,  rainfall  may  be  advan- 
tageous for  other  purposes,  including  its  inhibiting  lightning-caused 
forest  fires  by  providing  moisture  to  the  forest  fuel.  Consequently,  the 
advantages  which  might  be  achieved  through  reducing  cloud  con- 


13  Stow,  C.  D..  "On  the  Prevention  of  Lightning,"  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological 
Society,  vol.  50,  No.  7,  July  1969,  p.  515. 


99 


vection  and  its  attendant  electrical  activity  must  be  weighed  against 
the  possible  advantages  lost  through  reduced  precipitation.13 

A  more  efficient  lightning-suppression  approach  might  involve  in- 
terference with  the  processes  which  bring  about  charge  separation  in 
the  cloud.  At  least  five  different  mechanisms  by  which  cloud  electrifica- 
tion is  established  have  been  theorized,  and  possibly  all  or  most  of  these 
mechanisms  are  active  in  any  given  situation,  although  on  different 
occasions  it  is  likely  that  some  are  more  effective  than  others,  depend- 
ing on  meteorological  conditions  and  geographical  locations.14  Data 
are  as  yet  insufficient  for  determining  which  mechanisms  will  predomi- 
nate. It  is  not  considered  likely  that  a  single  treatment  method  would 
suffice  to  suppress  all  lightning  activity  through  prevention  of  charge 
buildup,  though  it  is  conceivable  that  a  given  treatment  may  be  capable 
of  suppressing  more  than  one  charge-generating  process.15  In  addition 
to  glaciation  of  the  cloud  by  overseeding  (described  above  in  connec- 
tion with  convection  reduction),  accumulation  of  charge  can  be  in- 
hibited through  seeding  with  various  chemicals  which  affect  the 
freezing  of  water.  Another  technique  uses  seeding  with  a  conducting 
chaff  (very  fine  metalized  nylon  fibers),  which  increases  conductivity 
between  oppositely  charged  regions  of  the- storm  and  keeps  the  electric 
field  from  building  up  to  the  lightning-discharge  level.  The  chaff  fibers 
are  of  the  type  that  have  been  used  for  radar  "jamming,"  which  can  be 
dispensed  underneath  a  thunderstorm  from  an  aircraft.  Experiments 
have  shown  this  attempt  at  lightning  suppression  to  have  some 
promise.16 

Although  reduction  in  the  number  of  cloud-to-ground  discharges 
through  cloud  seeding  would  undoubtedly  be  instrumental  in  de- 
creasing the  total  number  of  forest  fires,  ignition  is  also  influenced  by 
such  factors  as  the  type  of  discharge,  surface  weather  conditions,  the 
terrain-fuel  complex,  and  the  influence  of  preceding  weather  on  fuel 
moisture.  The  kind  of  discharge  most  frequently  causing  forest  fires 
has  been  observed  and  its  characteristics  have  been  measured.  Observa- 
tions indicate  that  ignition  is  most  often  caused  by  hybrid  cloud-to- 
ground  discharges  having  long  continuing  current  phases,  whose 
duration  exceeds  40  milliseconds  and  that  the  probability  of  ignition  is 
proportional  to  the  duration  of  the  continuing  current  phase.17 

Evaluation  of  lightning  suppression  technology 

Seeding  experiments  to  date  have  yielded  results  which  suggest  that 
both  the  characteristics  and  the  frequency  of  lightning  discharges  have 
been  modified.  The  physical  processes  by  which  lightning  is  modified 
are  not  understood ;  however,  basic  physical  charging  processes  have 
been  altered  through  massive  overseeding  with  silver  iodide  freezing 
nuclei.  Direct  measurements  of  lightning  electricity  have  also  shown 
that  lightning  strokes  which  contain  a  long  continuing  current  are 
probably  responsible  for  most  lightning-ignited  forest  fires.  Keduction 
of  the  duration  of  the  long  continuing  current  discharge  through  wea- 
ther modification  techniques  may,  therefore,  be  more  significant  in 

13  Ibid. 

"  Ibid.,  pp.  516-519. 
16  Ibid  ,  p  519 

"  Kasemir.  Heinz  W..  "Lightning  Suppression  by  Chaff  Seeding  and  Triggered  Light- 
ning." In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (editor),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wiley. 
1974, N  pp.  612-622.  n       a  .     „     .  B   „ 

"Fuquav,  "Lightning  Damage  and  Lightning  Modification  Caused  by  Cloud  Seeding, 
1974,  p.  606. 


100 


reducing  forest  fires  than  reduction  of  the  total  amount  of  lightning 
produced  by  storms. 

From  experiments  in  lightning  suppression  carried  out  under  Proj- 
ect Skyfire  by  the  U.S.  Forest  Service  of  the  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture between  1965-67.  Fuquay  summarizes  the  following  specific  re- 
sults, based  on  a  total  of  26  individual  storms  (12  seeded  and  14 
unseeded)  : 18 

Sixty-six  percent  fewer  cloud-to-ground  discharges,  50  percent 
fewer  intracloud  discharges,  and  54  percent  less  total  storm  light- 
ning occurred  during  seeded  storms  than  during  the  not-seeded 
storms. 

The  maximum  cloud-to-ground  flash  rate  was  less  for  seeded 
storms :  over  a  5-minute  interval,  the  maximum  rate  averaged  8.8 
for  not-seeded  storms  and  5  for  seeded  storms;  for  15-minute  in- 
tervals, the  maximum  rate  for  not-seeded  storms  averaged  17.7 
and  9.1  for  seeded  storms. 

The  mean  duration  of  lightning  activity  for  the  not-seeded  and 
seeded  storms  was  101  and  64  minutes,  respectively.  Lightning 
duration  of  the  not-seeded  storms  ranged  from  10  to  217  minutes, 
while  that  of  seeded  storms  ranged  from  21  to  99  minutes. 

There  was  no  difference  in  the  average  number  of  return  strokes 
per  discrete  discharge  (4.1  not-seeded  versus  4  seeded)  ;  however, 
a  significant  difference  was  found  for  hybrid  discharges  (5.6  not- 
seeded  versus  3.8  seeded) . 

The  average  duration  of  discrete  discharges  (period  between 
first  and  last  return  stroke)  decreased  from  235  milliseconds  for 
not  seeded  storms  to  182  milliseconds  for  seeded  storms. 

The  average  duration  of  continuing  current  in  hybrid  dis- 
charges decreased  from  187  milliseconds  for  not-seeded  storms  to 
115  milliseconds  for  seeded  storms. 
In  a  recent  Federal  appraisal  of  weather  modification  technology 
it  was  concluded  that  results  of  field  experiments  to  suppress  light- 
ning through  silver  iodide  seeding  have  been  ambiguous.19  Although 
aim  lysis  of  data  previously  obtained  is  continuing,  the  experimental 
seeding  program  of  the  Forest  Service  has  been  terminated.  In  more 
recent  experiments,  thunderstorms  have  been  seeded  from  below 
with  chaff  (very  fine  metalized  nylon  fibers).  Based  on  an  analysis  of 
10  chaff-seeded  thunderstorms  and  18  unseeded  control  storms,  the 
number  of  lightning  occurrences  during  the  seeded  storms  was  about 
25  percent  of  those  observed  in  the  control  storms.  This  observed  differ- 
ence was  statistically  significant  even  though  the  experiments  were 
not  strictly  randomized.20 

Experiments  in  lightning  modification  through  cloud  seeding  have 
given  results  showing  that,  in  some  cases,  lightning  can  be  modified 
in  a  beneficial  manner.  From  these  results  and  the  measured  charac- 
teristics of  lightning  strokes,  a  hypothesis  of  lightning  modification  is 
being  developed.  There  has  been  progress  in  identifying  significant  cor- 
relations between  occurrence  of  lightning  and  such  variables  as  storm 

u  Fuquav.  "Lightning  Damage  and  Lightning  Modification  Caused  by  Cloud  Seeding," 
1974,  p.  6li. 

19  U.S.  Domestic  Council,  Environmental  Resources  Committee,  Subcommittee  on  Climate 
Change,  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification."  Washington,  D.C.,  December  1975. 
p.  10. 

*>Ibid. 


101 


size,  updraft  characteristics,  precipitation  rates,  and  hail  occurrence. 
According  to  Fuquay,  such  early  successes  ought  not  obscure  the  mag- 
nitude of  the  research  yet  required  in  order  to  identify  and  quantify 
the  degree  and  applicability  of  lightning  modification  to  the  lightning- 
fire  problem.21  He  also  warns  that : 

Until  more  is  known  about  the  adverse  effects  of  seeding  incipient  thunder- 
storms, unexpected  and  adverse  effects  must  be  considered,  although  improved 
numerical  models  that  accurately  predict  cloud  development  and  the  effects  of 
seeding  should  minimize  the  risk  of  unexpected  events.22 

MODIFICATION  OF  SEVERE  STORMS 

Severe  storms  have  a  greater  immediate  impact  on  human  life  and 
property  than  most  other  weather  phenomena.  A  major  portion  of 
losses  due  to  natural  disasters  results  from  two  of  the  most  destructive 
kinds  of  severe  storms — hurricanes  and  tornadoes.  During  an  average 
year  the  U.S.  mainland  is  threatened  by  8  tropical  slorms  and  experi- 
ences over  600  tornadoes.23  Among  the  results  of  the  annual  devastation 
from  these  storms  are  the  loss  of  hundreds  of  lives  and  the  accumula- 
tion of  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  in  property  damage. 

Perhaps  the  most  important  problems  to  be  attacked  in  weather 
modification  are  associated  with  the  abatement  of  severe  storms.  While 
rainfall  augmentation  promises  borderline  economic  value  at  best,  al- 
ternatives which  can  contribute  more  significantly  to  severe  water 
shortages  may  prove  more  suitable.  On  the  other  hand,  the  annual 
threat  of  tolls  in  damages  and  fatalities  from  hurricanes  and  tornadoes 
will  persist  year  after  year,  and  research  directed  toward  modification 
of  these  severe  phenomena  requires  continued  support.  There  have  been 
dramatic  attempts,  with  some  successes,  in  demonstrating  the  potential 
reduction  of  the  hazards  of  hurricanes ;  however,  almost  no  research 
has  been  directed  toward  tornado  suppression. 

Hurricanes 

A  hurricane  is  an  intense  cyclone  which  forms  over  tropical  seas, 
smaller  in  size  than  middle-latitude  cyclones,  but  much  larger  than  a 
tornado  or  a  thunderstorm.  With  an  average  size  of  500  miles  (800 
kilometers)  in  diameter,  the  hurricane  consists  of  a  doughnut-shaped 
ring  of  strong  winds  in  excess  of  64  knots  which  surrounds  an  area  of 
extremely  low  pressure  and  calm  at  the  storm's  center,  called  the  eye.2* 
The  generic  name  for  all  vortical  circulations  originating  over  tropi- 
cal waters  is  "tropical  cyclone."  When  fully  developed  with  sufficiently 
strong  winds,  such  storms  are  called  hurricanes  in  the  Atlantic  and  the 
eastern  Pacific  Oceans,  typhoons  in  the  northwest  Pacific,  baguios  in 
the  Philippines,  Bengal  cyclones  in  the  Indian  Ocean,  and  willy-willies 
near  Australia.  For  a  tropic  cyclone  whose  winds  are  in  the  range  of 
33  to  64  knots,  the  official  name' in  the  United  States  is  a  tropical  storm. 
The  hurricane  season  is  that  portion  of  the  year  having  a  relatively 

21  Fuquay,  "Lightning  Damage  and  Lightning  Modification  Caused  by  Cloud  Seeding," 
1974.  p.  612. 

22  Ibid.,  p.  606. 

23  Feieral  Coordinator  for  Meteorological  Services  and  Supporting  Research.  "Federal 
Plan  for  Meteorological  Services  and  Supporting  Resenrch  :  Fiscal  Year  1973."  U.S.  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Washington,  D.C., 
January  1972.  p.  1. 

24Anthes,  Richard  A..  Hans  A.  Panofskv.  -Tohn  J.  Cahir.  and  Albert  Rango.  "The  Atmos- 
phere." Columbus,  Ohio,  Charles  E.  Merrill.  1975.  p.  150. 


102 


high  incidence  of  hurricanes  and  usually  is  regarded  as  the  period 
between  June  and  November  in  the  Northern  Hemisphere.25 

Owing  to  their  duration,  which  exceeds  that  of  earthquakes,  and  to 
their  violence,  which  approaches  that  of  tornadoes,  hurricanes  are  the 
most  destructive  natural  phenomena.  Prior  to  Hurricane  Agnes  in 
1972,  whose  total  damage  exceeded  $3  billion,  the  annual  hurricane 
property  losses  in  the  United  States  amounted  to  about  $450  million, 
although  two  hurricanes  in  the  1960's,  Betsy  (1965)  and  Camille 
(1969),  each  caused  damage  exceeding  $1.4  billion.26  Improved  tech- 
niques in  hurricane  detection  and  warning  have  dramatically  reduced 
the  number  of  deaths  caused  by  hurricanes ;  however,  property  losses 
have  continued  to  grow,  as  a  result  of  increased  population  and  activi- 
ties in  vulnerable  coastal  areas,  with  the  attendant  concentration  of 
new  houses,  buildings,  and  other  facilities  of  higher  replacement  value. 
Figure  8  shows  the  simultaneous  increase  in  property  losses  and  de- 
crease in  deaths  due  to  hurricanes  in  the  United  States  in  the  20th 
century  through  1969. 

Devastation  and  fatalities  occur  essentially  from  three  phenomena 
associated  with  hurricanes :  the  force  of  the  winds  in  the  storm  itself, 
the  storm  surge  on  coastal  areas,  and  flooding  which  can  result  from 
excessive  and  widespread  rainfall  as  the  storm  moves  inland.  Since 
wind  force  varies  with  the  square  of  the  wind  speed,  a  50-mile-per-hour 
wind  exerts  four  times  as  much  force  as  a  25-mile-per-hour  wind.  Ac- 
cordingly, a  10-percent  reduction  in  maximum  windspeed  yields  a  de- 
crease in  wind  force  of  about  20  percent.27  Attempts  to  modify  hurri- 
cane winds  can  thus  be  expected  to  reduce  storm  damage  caused  by 
winds  in  approximate  proportion  to  the  corresponding  reduction  in 
wind  force. 

25  Federal  Coordinator  for  Meteorological  Services  and  Supporting  Research,  U.S.  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  "National  Hurricane 
Operations  Plan,"  FCM  77-  2.  Washington,  D.C.,  May  1977,  pp.  6-7. 

20  Gentry,  K.  Cecil,  "Hurricane  Modification."  In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.).  "Weather  and 
Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  John  Wiley  &  Sons,  1974,  p.  497. 

27  Ibid.,  p.  498. 


103 


Figure  8. — Losses  in  the  United  States  from  hurricanes,  1915  through  1969,  in 
5-year  periods  (from  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration). 

_  As  a  hurricane  moves  across  the  coast  from  the  sea.  the  strong  winds 
pile  up  water  to  extreme  heights,  causing  storm  surges.  The  resulting 
onrushing  water  wreaks  damage  to  shoreline  and  coastal  structures. 
The  severity  of  the  storm  surge  is  increased  by  the  hurricane-generated 
wind  waves  which  are  superimposed  on  the  surge.  From  Hurricane 
Camille,  the  storm  surge  at  Pass  Christian,  Miss.,  was  24.6  feet,  higher 
than  any  previous  recorded  tide.  As  a  result,  135  people  were  killed, 
63,000  families  suffered  personal  losses,  and  Mississippi  alone  sustained 
$1  billion  in  damage.28  The  height  of  the  storm  surge  depends  both  on 


Anthes,  Panofsky,  Cahir,  and  Rango,  "The  Atmosphere,"  1975,  p.  159. 


104 


the  windspeed  and  the  shape  and  slope  of  the  sea  bottom  offshore.  If 
there  is  a  sharp  dropoff  in  depth  not  far  off  the  beach,  the  rise  of  the 
sea  level  will  be  small,  for  example.  Nearshore  attempts  to  modify  a 
hurricane  could  lead  to  uncertain  results,  depending  upon  local  condi- 
tions. If  the  windspeed  is  reduced  without  moving  the  position  of 
maximum  winds  along  the  coast,  the  overall  effect  would  likely  be  a 
reduction  in  storm  surge.  However,  should  the  modification  activity 
result  in  developing  a  new  windspeed  maximum  at  a  different  location, 
the  surge  might  increase  or  decrease,  depending  on  bathymetry  and 
bottom  topography.29  Solutions  are  not  yet  clear,  and  the  storm  surge 
prediction  problem  is  being  studied  intensely  with  the  use  of  numerical 
models. 

Major  hurricane  damage  can  often  be  attributed  to  heavy  rains  and 
the  massive  and  sudden  flooding  which  can  result  as  the  storm  move's 
inland.  In  mountainous  regions  especially,  the  floods  from  such  rain- 
fall can  be  devastating  in  losses  to  both  life  and  property.  Such  flood- 
ing was  a  major  contributor  to  the  118  deaths  and  $3.5  billion  in  prop- 
erty destruction 30  which  resulted  in  June  1972  from  Hurricane  Agnes, 
which  set  the  record  of  achieving  the  greatest  damage  toll  of  all  U.S. 
hurricanes.  Ironically,  Agnes  caused  almost  no  major  damage  as  it 
went  ashore.  Hurricane  modification  activities  which  have  been  at- 
tempted or  are  contemplated  are  unfortunately  not  designed  to  reduce 
the  rains  significantly,  but  are  intended  rather  to  reduce  the  maxi- 
mum winds.31 

Generation  and  characteristics  of  hurricanes 

A  hurricane  can  be  thought  of  as  a  simple  heat  engine  driven  by 
temperature  differences  between  the  center  of  the  storm  and  its  mar- 
gins. At  each  level  the  central  column  must  be  warmer  than  the 
surrounding  area  to  insure  maintenance  of  the  strong  convection  on 
which  the  storm  depends.32  While  the  energy  which  forms  extratropical 
cyclones  is  provided  by  temperature  differences  between  different  air 
masses,  the  energy  which  generates  and  maintains  hurricanes  and 
other  tropical  cyclones  is  derived  from  a  single  air  mass  through 
condensation  of  water  vapor,  and  there  are  seldom  present  any  of 
the  frontal  activities  which  are  characteristic  of  storms  originating 
in  temperate  latitudes.  The  moisture-laden  winds  continuously  supply 
water  vapor  to  the  tropical  storm,  and  the  condensation  of  each  gram 
of  the  vapor  releases  about  580  calories  of  latent  heat.  Within  this 
thermally  driven  heat  engine  tremendous  quantities  of  energy  are 
converted  from  heat  to  mechanical  motion  in  a  short  time,  a  fact 
readily  apparent  from  the  fury  of  the  winds.  The  daily  power  of  the 
energy  liberated  within  a  hurricane  has  been  estimated  to  be  about 
ten  thousand  times  the  daily  power  consumption  in  the  United  States.33 
The  importance  of  tin1  ocean  in  providing  moisture  to  a  hurricane 
is  seen  in  the  weakening  and  dissipation  of  the  storms  after  they  have 
crossed  coastlines  and  travel  over  land. 

20  Gentrv.  "Hurricane  Modification,"  1974.  p.  499. 

30  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere.  "The  Agnes  Floods.:  a  Cost- 
Audit  of  the  Effectiveness  of  t^c  Storm  and  Flood  Warning  System  of  the  National  Oceanic 
and  Atmosnheric  Administration,"  a  report  for  the  Administrator  of  NOAA.  Washington, 
D.C.,  Nov.  22.  1972.  p.  1. 

:;1  Gentrv.  "Hurricane-Modification."  H>74.  n.  490. 

^Donn.  William  L.  "Meteorology."  4th  edition.  New  York.  McGraw-Hill,  1975,  p.  336. 
"Ibid.,  p.  338. 


105 


Exactly  how  hurricanes  form  is  not  yet  fully  understood.  They 
are  all  generated  in  the  doldrums  (a  region  of  equatorial  calms), 
though  rarely  if  ever  within  latitudes  closer  than  5  degrees  from  the 
Equator,  over  water  whose  temperature  is  at  least  27°  C.  The  relatively 
high  surface  temperature  is  necessary  for  initiation  of  the  convection. 
Hurricanes  are  relatively  rare  features  even  of  the  tropics,  and  the 
exact  triggering  mechanism  is  not  yet  known.34  Their  origin  is  usually 
traced  to  a  low  pressure  disturbance  which  originates  on  the  equatorial 
side  of  the  trough  of  an  easterly  wave. 

Such  a  tropical  disturbance  moves  slowly  westward  and  slightly 
poleward  under  the  direction  of  the  tropical  east  winds.  If  conditions 
are  right,  this  cluster  of  thunderstorms  intensifies  as  it  reaches  the 
region  near  the  boundary  between  the  tropical  easterlies  and  the 
middle-latitude  westerlies,  at  about  25°  latitude.  It  may  then  follow 
a  path  which  reverses  toward  the  east  as  it  leaves  the  tropics.  The 
tracks  of  13  major  hurricanes  in  the  Northwest  Atlantic  Ocean  are 
shown  in  figure  9. 

The  development  of  the  intense  storm  which  might  result  from  the 
conditions  noted  above  is  described  in  the  following  way  by  Anthes 
et  al. : 

The  increased  inflow  toward  the  center  of  falling  pressure  produces  increased 
lifting  of  air,  so  that  the  thunderstorms  become  more  numerous  and  intense.  The 
feedback  cycle  is  now  established.  The  inflowing  air  fuels  more  intense  thunder- 
storm convection,  which  gradually  warms  and  moistens  the  environment.  The 
warmer  air  in  the  disturbance  weighs  less,  and  so  the  surface  pressure  continues 
to  fall.  The  farther  the  pressure  falls,  the  greater  the  inflow  and  the  stronger 
the  convection.  The  limit  to  this  process  would  occur  when  the  environment  is 
completely  saturated  by  cumulonimbus  clouds.  Further  condensation  heating 
would  not  result  in  additional  warming,  because  the  heat  released  would  exactly 
compensate  for  the  cooling  due  to  the  upward  expansion  of  the  rising  air.35 

34  Ibid. 

35  Anthes,  Panofsky,  Cahir,  and  Rango,  "The  Atmosphere,"  1975,  p.  154. 


106 


Figure  9. — Tracks  of  thirteen  major  hurricanes  in  the  Xorth  Atlantic  from  1879 
through  1955  (from  U.S.  Naval  Oceanographic  Office,  Publication  No.  21, 
Sailing  Directions  for  the  West  Indies,  1958). 

As  the  storm  forms,  the  winds  begin  to  strengthen  about  the  center, 
increasing  especially  to  the  right  of  the  direction  in  which  the  center 
is  moving,  normally  on  the  poleward  side.  The  clouds  organize  them- 
selves into  a  system  and  dense  cirrus  move  forward  in  the  direction 
of  the  movement  of  the  center.  Suddenly,  the  pressure  falls  over  a 
small  area  and  hurricane  force  winds  form  a  tight  band  of  20  to  40 


107 


miles  radius  around  the  center.  The  well-organized  clouds  show  a 
spiraling  structure,  and  the  storm  acquires  an  eye,  a  small  nearly 
circular  area,  coinciding  with  the  region  of  lowest  pressure.  The  winds 
in  the  eye  are  light  and  variable  and  the  clouds  are  scattered  or 
entirely  absent.36  As  the  storm  matures,  the  pressure  ceases  to  fall 
and  the  maximum  winds  do  not  increase  further.  Now  the  storm  ex- 
pands horizontally  and  large  amounts  of  air  are  drawn  in.  As  the 
storm  expands  to  a  radius  of  about  200  miles  or  more  it  becomes  less 
symmetrical.  Figure  10  is  a  vertical  cross-section  of  the  structure  of 
a  typical  mature  hurricane,  showing  the  direction  of  flow  and  cloud 
distribution.37 

In  spite  of  the  great  damage  and  fatalities  caused  by  hurricanes, 
their  effects  are  not  completely  destructive.  In  many  areas  of  South- 
east Asia  and  the  west  coast  of  Mexico,  tropical  storms  are  depended 
upon  for  a  large  part  of  the  water  supply.  Throughout  the  Southern 
United  States,  hurricanes  have  also  provided  valuable  drought  relief.38 
-  Hurricane  and  other  tropical  cyclones  are  always  characterized  by 
high  wind  velocities  and  by  torrential  rains.  Wind  velocities  of  60  to 
70  knots  and  more  are  normal  for  such  storms.  The  air  rotates  rapidly, 
moving  spirally  toward  the  center.  Maximum  gusts  exceed  100  knots 
and  may  reach  200  knots,  although  such  high  speeds  are  unrecorded 
since  instruments  are  blown  away  or  made  inoperable  at  these  wind 
speeds.39 


Figure  10. — Vertical  cross  section  through  a  hurricane,  showing  typical  cloud 
distribution  and  direction  of  flow,  as  functions  of  height  and  distance  from 
the  eye.  (From  Anthes,  Panofsky,  Cahir,  and  Rango,  1975.) 

Compared  with  extratropical  storms,  hurricanes  are  generally  small, 
circularly  shaped  zones  of  intense  low  pressure,  with  very  steep  pres- 
sure gradients  between  the  center  and  the  periphery.  The  pressure 
drop  between  the  eye  and  the  periphery  is  quite  large,  20  to  70  milli- 
bars being  typical.  The  winds  are  in  a  constant  circular  cyclonic 
motion  (counterclockwise  in  the  Northern  Hemisphere  and  clockwise 
in  the  Southern  Hemisphere)  ;  however,  the  center  of  the  storm  is  a 

36  pPtterssen.  Sverre.  "Introduction  to  Meteorology,"  second  edition,  New  York,  McGraw- 
Hill.  1958,  pp.  242-243. 

37  Anthes.  Panofsky.  Cahir.  and  Rango.  "The  Atmosphere,"  1975.  p.  157. 

ssReihl,  Herbert,  "Introduction  to  the  Atmosphere,"  New  York,  McGraw-Hill,  1965,  pp. 
178-179. 

39  Gentilli.  J..  "Tropical  Cyclones."  In  Rhodes  W.  Fairbridge  fed.).  "The  Encyclopedia 
of  Atmospheric  Sciences  and  Astrogeology."  Reinhold,  New  York,  1967,  p.  1028. 


*  Widely  scattered 
_  — —  shallow  cumulus 


1000 


Distance  from  hurricane  center  (km) 


108 


calm  region  of  low  pressure,  called  the  eye.  which  is  about  10  miles 
across  on  the  average.  The  warm  dry  character  of  this  region  is  due 
to  subsiding  air,  which  is  necessary  for  existence  of  the  storm.  Around 
the  eye  is  the  wall,  consisting  of  cumulonimbus  clouds  and  the  at- 
tendant extreme  instability  and  rising  motion;  in  the  wall  area  adja- 
cent to  the  eye,  heavy  rains  fall.  Out  from  the  central  zone  altostratus 
and  nimbostratus  clouds  mix  to  form  a  layer  with  a  radius  as  great 
as  200  miles.  At  higher  altitudes  and  reaching  to  the  outer  regions 
of  the  storm  is  a  mixture  of  cirrus  and  cirrostratus  clouds.40 

In  a  mature  hurricane  a  state  of  relative  equilibrium  is  reached 
eventually,  with  a  particular  distribution  of  wind,  temperature,  and 
pressure.  Such  distributions  for  a  typical  hurricane  are  shown  sche- 
matically in  figure  11.  Note  that  the  greatest  pressure  change  and  the 
maximum  windspeeds  are  in  the  region  of  the  wall  clouds,  near  the 
center  of  the  storm.41 


Figtjbe  11.— Radial  profiles  of  temperature,  pressure,  and  windspeed  for  a  mature 
hurricane.  The  temperature  profile  applies  to  levels  of  3  to  14  kilometers; 
pressure  and  windspeed  profiles  apply  to  levels  near  the  surface.  (From 
Gentry,  1974. ) 

Modification  of  hurricanes 

Since  the  damage  inflicted  by  hurricanes  is  primarily  a  result  of  the 
high  windspeeds,  the  principal  goal  of  beneficial  hurricane  modifica- 

40  Jerome  Williams.  John  J.  Hipsinson.  and  John  D.  Rohrhoujjh.  "Sea  and  Air:  The 
Naval  Environment,"  Annapolis.  Md..  U.S.  Naval  Institute.  1968,  pp.  262-263. 

41  Gentry.  "Hurricane  Modification."  1974.  pp.  502-503. 


109 


tion  is  the  reduction  of  the  severity  of  the  storm's  maximum  winds. 
The  winds  result  from  the  pressure  distribution,  which,  in  turn,  is 
dependent  on  the  temperature  distribution.  Thus,  hurricane  winds 
might  be  reduced  through  reduction  of  temperature  contrasts  between 
the  core  of  the  storm  and  the  region  outside. 

Gentry  notes  that  there  are  at  least  two  important  fundamentals  of 
hurricanes  which  have  been  established  through  recent  studies,  which 
suggest  possible  approaches  to  modification  of  the  severity  of  the 
storms : 42 

The  transfer  of  sensible  and  latent  heat  from  the  sea  surface  to  the 
air  inside  the  storm  is  necessary  if  the  hurricane  is  to  reach  or  retain 
even  moderate  intensity. 

The  energy  for  the  entire  synoptic-scale  hurricane  is  released  by 
moist  convection  in  highly  organized  convective-scale  circulations  lo- 
cated in  and  around  the  eye  of  the  storm  and  in  the  major  rain  bands. 
The  first  principle  accounts  for  the  fact  that  hurricanes  form  only 
over  warm  tropical  waters  and  begin  to  dissipate  after  moving  over 
land  or  cool  water,  since  neither  can  provide  sufficient  energy  flow  to 
the  atmosphere  to  maintain  the  intensity  of  the  storm.  The  second 
principle  explains  why  such  a  low  percentage  of  tropical  disturbances 
grow  to  hurricane  intensity.  Possible  field  experiments  for  beneficial 
modification  of  hurricanes  follow  from  these  principles.  On  the  basis 
of  the  first,  techniques  for  inhibiting  evaporation  might  be  employed 
to  reduce  energy  flux  from  the  sea  surface  to  the  atmosphere.  Based 
on  the  second  principle,  it  might  be  possible  to  affect  the  rate  of  release 
of  latent  heat  in  that  small  portion  of  the  total  storm  which  is  occupied 
by  the  active  convective-scale  motions  in  such  a  way  that  the  storm  is 
weakened  through  redistribution  of  heating.43 

Gentry  discusses  a  number  of  possible  mechanisms  which  have  been 
suggested  for  bringing  about  changes  to  the  temperature  field  in  a 
hurricane.44  Since  the  warm  core  development  is  strongly  influenced 
by  the  quantity  of  latent  heat  available  for  release  in  air  columns  ris- 
ing near  the  center  of  the  storm,  the  temperature  might  be  decreased 
through  reducing  the  water  vapor  in  these  columns,  the  water  vapor 
originating  through  evaporation  from  the  sea  surface  inside  the  region 
of  high  storm  winds.  It  has  been  suggested  that  a  film  spread  over  the 
ocean  would  thus  reduce  such  evaporation.  No  such  film  is  available, 
however,  which  could  serve  this  purpose  and  withstand  rupturing  and 
disintegration  by  the  winds  and  waves  of  the  storm.  Another  sugges- 
tion, tiiat  the  cooling  of  the  sea  surface  might  be  achieved  through 
dropping  cold  material  from  ships  or  aircraft,  is  impractical,  since 
such  great  expenditure  of  energy  is  required.  It  has  also  been  postu- 
lated that  the  radiation  mechanisms  near  the  top  of  the  hurricane  might 
be  modified  through  distribution  of  materials  of  various  radiation 
properties  at  selected  locations  in  the  clouds,  thus  inducing  changes  to 
the  temperatures  in  the  upper  part  of  the  storm.  This  latter  suggestion 
needs  further  evaluation  both  from  the  standpoint  of  its  practicality 
and  from  the  effect  such  a  change,  if  included,  would  theoretically  have 
on  storm  intensity. 

The  potential  schemes  for  hurricane  modification  which  seem  to  be 
practical  logistically  and  offer  some  hope  for  success  involve  attempts 

42  Ibid.,  1974.  p.  503. 
«  Ibid.,  p.  504. 
44  Ibid.,  p.  505. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  10 


110 


to  modify  the  mechanism  by  which  the  convective  processes  in  the  eye- 
wall  and  the  rain  bands  distribute  heat  through  the  storm.  Since  water 
vapor  is  condensed  and  latent  heat  released  in  the  convective  clouds,  it 
should  be  possible  to  influence  the  heat  distribution  in  the  storm 
through  changing  the  pattern  of  these  clouds.45  Recent  success  in 
modifying  cumulus  clouds  promises  some  hope  of  success  in  hurricane 
modification  through  cloud  seeding.  By  modifying  the  clouds  in  a  hur- 
ricane, the  storm  itself  may  be  modified,  since  the  storm's  intensity  will 
be  affected  through  changing  the  interactions  between  the  convective 
(cloud)  scale  and  the  synoptic  (hurricane)  scales.46  Figure  12  shows 
how  the  properties  of  a  hurricane  might  be  redistributed  as  a  result 
of  changing  the  temperature  structure  through  seeding  the  cumulus 
cloud  structure  outside  the  wall.  The  solid  curves  in  the  figure  repre- 
sent distributions  of  temperature,  pressure,  and  windspeed  identical 
with  those  shown  in  figure  11  without  seeding;  the  dashed  curves  rep- 
resent these  properties  as  modified  through  seeding.47 

The  first  attempt  at  hurricane  modification  was  undertaken  by  sci- 
entists of  the  General  Electric  Co.,  on  a  hurricane  east  of  Jacksonville, 
Fla.,  on  October  13, 1947.  Clouds  outside  of  the  wall  were  seeded  with 
dry  ice  in  order  to  cause  freezing  of  supercooled  water,  so  that  the  ac- 
companying release  of  latent  heat  might  alter  the  storm  in  some  man- 
ner. Results  of  the  experiment  could  not  be  evaluated,  however,  owing 
to  the  lack  of  adequate  measuring  equipment  for  recording  cloud  char- 
acteristics. Furthermore,  the  penetration  of  the  wall  clouds  to  the  eye 
or  to  the  area  of  intense  convection  in  the  storm's  rain  bands  was  pre- 
vented by  failure  of  navigation  aids.  Based  on  information  acquired 
from  more  recent  seeding  experiments  and  increased  understanding  of 
hurricanes,  it  seems  doubtful  that  the  1947  seeding  could  have  been 
effective.48 

«  Ibid. 

"Ibid.,  p.  504. 
«Ibid.,  pp.  504-505. 
48  Ibid.,  pp.  505-506. 


Ill 


Figure  12. — Radial  profiles  of  temperature,  pressure,  and  windspeed  for  a  mature 
hurricane  before  (solid  curves)  and  possible  changes  after  (dashed  curves) 
seeding.  (The  solid  curves  are  the  same  as  those  in  fig.  11.)  (From  Gentry, 
1974.) 

Hurricane  seeding  experiments  were  undertaken  by  the  Department 
of  Commerce  and  other  agencies  of  the  Federal  Government  in  1961, 
initiating  what  came  to  be  called  Project  Stormfury.  To  date  only  four 
hurricanes  have'  actually  been  seeded  under  this  project — all  of  them 
between  1961  and  1971 ;  however,  Stormfury  has  also  included  inves- 
tigation of  fundamental  properties  of  hurricanes  and  their  possible 
modification  through  computer  modeling  studies,  through  careful 
measurements  of  hurricane  properties  with  research  probes,  and 
through  improvements  in  seeding  capabilities. 

The  goal  of  hurricane  seeding  is  the  reduction  of  the  maximum  winds 
through  dispersing  the  energy  normally  concentrated  in  the  relatively 
small  band  around  the  center  of  the  storm.  The  basic  rationale  for  seed- 
ing a  hurricane  with  silver  iodide  is  to  release  latent  heat  through 
seeding  the  clouds  in  the  eye  wall,  thus  attempting  to  change  the  tem- 
perature distribution  and  consequently  weaken  the  sea  level  pressure 
gradient.  It  is  assumed  that  the  weakened  pressure  gradient  will  allow 
outward  expansion,  with  the  result  that  the  belt  of  maximum  winds 
will  migrate  away  from  the  center  of  the  storm  and  will  therefore 
weaken.  Actually,  stimulation  of  condensation  releases  much  more 
latent  heat  than 'first  hypothesized  in  1961,  and  theoretical  hurricane 
models  show  that  a  new  eve  wall  of  greater  diameter  can  be  developed 
by  encouraging  growth  of  cumulus  clouds  through  dynamic  seeding.49 


»  Ibid.,  pp.  510-511. 


112 


Following  seeding  of  the  four  storms  in  Project  Stormf ury,  changes 
were  perceived,  but  all  such  changes  fell  within  the  range  of  natural 
variability  expected  of  hurricanes.  In  no  case,  however,  did  a  seeded 
storm  appear  to  increase  in  strength.  Hurricane  Debbie,  seeded  first 
on  August  18,  1969,  exhibited  changes,  however,  which  are  rarely 
observed  in  unseeded  storms.  Maximum  winds  decreased  by  about  30 
percent,  and  radar  showed  that  the  eye  wall  had  expanded  to  a  larger 
diameter  shortly  after  seeding.  After  Debbie  had  regained  her  strength 
on  August  19,  she  was  seeded  again  on  August  20,  following  which 
her  maximum  winds  decreased  by  about  15  percent.50  Unfortunately, 
data  are  not  adequate  to  determine  conclusively  that  changes  induced 
in  Debbie  resulted  from  seeding  or  from  natural  forces.  Observations 
from  Hurricane  Debbie  are  partially  supported  by  results  from  simu- 
lated experiments  with  a  theoretical  hurricane  model ;  however,  simu- 
lation of  modification  experiments  with  other  theoretical  models  have 
yielded  contrary  results.51 

One  of  the  problems  in  evaluating  the  results  of  hurricane  modifi- 
cation is  related  to  the  low  frequency  of  occurrence  of  hurricanes 
suitable  for  seeding  experiments  and  the  consequent  small  number  of 
such  experiments  upon  which  conclusions  can  be  based.  This  fact  re- 
quires that  hurricane  seeding  experiments  must  be  even  more  carefully 
planned,  and  monitoring  measurements  must  be  very  comprehensive, 
so  that  data  acquired  in  the  few  relatively  large  and  expensive  experi- 
ments can  be  put  to  maximum  use.  Meanwhile  theoretical  models  must 
be  improved  in  order  to  show  the  sensitivity  of  hurricane  characteris- 
tics to  changes  which  might  be  induced  through  seeding  experiments. 

Gentry  has  suggested  that  the  following  future  activities  should  be 
conducted  under  Stormf  ury  : 52 

1.  Increased  efforts  to  improve  theoretical  models. 

2.  Collection  of  data  to  further  identify  natural  variability  in 
hurricanes. 

3.  Expanded  research — both  theoretical  and  experimental — on 
physics  of  hurricane  clouds  and  interactions  between  the  cloud 
and  hurricane  scales  of  motion. 

4.  More  field  experiments  on  tropical  cyclones  at  every  oppor- 
tunity. 

5.  Tests  of  other  methods  and  material  for  seeding. 

6.  Further  evaluation  of  other  hypotheses  for  modifying 
hurricanes. 

7.  Development  of  the  best  procedures  to  maximize  results  of 
field  experiments. 

Tornadoes 

The  structure  of  tornadoes  is  similar  to  that  of  hurricanes,  consist- 
ing of  strong  cyclonic  winds  53  blowing  around  a  very  low  pressure 
center.  The  size  of  a  tornado,  however,  is  much  smaller  than  that  of  a 
hurricane,  and  its  wind  force  is  often  greater.  The  diameter  of  a  tor- 
so National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.  "Stormfury— 1977  to  Seed  One 
Atlantic  Hurricane  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  News,  NOAA  77-248,  Washington. 
D.C.,  Sept.  20.  1977,  p.  3. 

51  Gentry,  "Hurricane  Modification,"  1974.  p.  517. 

^  Cyclonic > winds  blow  counterclockwise  around  a  low  pressure  center  in  the  Northern 
Hemisphere  ;  in  the  Southern  Hemisphere  they  blow  clockwise. 


113 


nado  is  about  one- fourth  of  a  kilometer,  and  its  maximum  winds  can 
exceed  250  knots  in  extreme  cases.54  On  a  local  scale,  the  tornado  is  the 
most  destructive  of  all  atmospheric  phenomena.  They  are  extremely 
variable,  and  their  short  lifetime  and  small  size  make  them  nearly 
impossible  to  forecast  with  any  precision. 

Tornadoes  occur  in  various  parts  of  the  world;  however,  in  the 
United  States  both  the  greatest  number  and  the  most  severe  tornadoes 
are  produced.  In  1976.  there  were  reported  832  tornadoes  in  this  coun- 
try,55 where  their  origin  can  be  traced  to  severe  thunderstorms,  formed 
when  warm,  moisture-laden  air  sweeping  in  from  the  Gulf  of  Mexico 
or  the  eastern  Pacific  strikes  cooler  air  fronts  over  the  land.  Some  of 
these  thunderstorms  are  characterised  by  the  Auolent  updrafts  and 
strong  tangential  winds  which  spawn  tornadoes,  although  the  details 
of  tornado  generation  are  still  not  fully  understood.  Tornadoes  are 
most  prevalent  in  the  spring  and  occur  over  much  of  the  Eastern  two- 
thirds  of  the  United  States;  the  highest  frequency  and  greatest  devas- 
tation are  experienced  in  the  States  of  the  middle  South  and  middle 
West.  Figure  13  shows  the  distribution  of  71,206  tornadoes  which 
touched  the  ground  in  the  contiguous  United  States  over  a  40-year 
period. 

Even  in  regions  of  the  world  favorable  to  severe  thunderstorms,  the 
vast  majority  of  such  storms  do  not  spawn  tornadoes.  Further- 
more, relatively  few  tornadoes  are  actually  responsible  for  deaths  and 
severe  property  damage.  Between  1960  and  1970,  85  percent  of  tornado 
fatalities  were  caused  by  only  1  to  iy2  percent  of  reported  tornadoes.56 
Nevertheless,  during  the  past  20  years  an  average  of  113  persons  have 
been  killed  annually  by  tornadoes  in  the  United  States,  and  the  annual 
property  damage  from  these  storms  has  been  about  $75  million.57 

Modification  of  tornadoes 

Alleviation  from  the  devastations  caused  by  tornadoes  through 
weather  modification  techniques  has  been  a  matter  of  considerable 
interest.  As  with  hurricanes,  any  such  modification  must  be  through 
some  kind  of  triggering  mechanism,  since  the  amount  of  energy  pres- 
ent in  the  thunderstorms  which  generate  tornadoes  is  quite  large.  The 
rate  of  energy  production  in  a  severe  thunderstorm  is  roughly  equal  to 
the  total  power-generating  capacity  in  the  United  States  in  1970.58 
The  triggering  mechanism  must  be  directed  at  modifying  the  circula- 
tion through  injection  of  small  quantities  of  energy. 

^  Anthes,  Panofsky,  Cahir,  and  Rango,  "The  Atmosphere,"  pp.  150,  180. 

50  NOAA  news.  "Skywarn  1977 — Defense  Against  Tornadoes,"  U.S.  Department  of  Com- 
merce, National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.  Rockville,  Md.,  Feb.  18,  1977, 
vol.  2,  No.  4,  pp.  4-5. 

56  Davies-Jones,  Robert  and  Edwin  Kessler,  "Tornadoes."  In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.), 
"Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  John  Wiley  &  Sons,  1974,  p.  552. 
»  Ibid. 

58  Anthes,  Panofsky,  Cahir,  and  Rango,  "The  Atmosphere,"  1975,  p.  185. 


114 


Figure  13. — Tornado  distribution  in  the  United  States,  where  contours  enclose 
areas  receiving  equal  numbers  of  tornadoes  over  a  40-year  period.  Frequencies 
are  based  on  number  of  2-degree  squares  experiencing  first  point  of  contact 
with  the  ground  for  71,206  tornadoes.  (From  Wilkins,  1967,  in  Encyclopedia 
of  Atmospheric  Sciences  and  Astrology,  Reinhold.) 

Tornado  modification  has  not  been  attempted  in  view  of  the  pres- 
ent insufficient  knowledge  about  their  nature  and  the  lack  of  adequate 
data  on  associated  windspeeds.  There  are  potential  possibilities,  how- 
ever, which  can  be  considered  for  future  research  in  tornado  modifica- 
tion. One  proposal  is  to  trigger  competing  meteorological  events  at 
strategic  locations  in  order  to  deprive  a  tornadic  storm  of  needed  in- 
flow. This  technique,  suggested  by  the  presence  of  cumulus  clouds  over 
forest  fires,  volcanoes,  and  atomic  bomb  blasts  could  use  arrays  of 
large  jet  engines  or  oil  burning  devices.  Another  approach  for  dis- 
persal of  convective  clouds  which  give  rise  to  thunderstorms  might 
involve  the  use  of  downrush  created  by  flying  jet  aircraft  through 
the  clouds.  A  further  possibility  would  depend  on  changing  the  char- 
acteristics of  the  Earth's  surface  such  as  the  albedo  or  the  availability 
of  water  for  evaporation.59 

Tornadoes  tend  to  weaken  over  rougher  surfaces  due  to  reduction 
of  net  low-level  inflow.  Upon  meeting  a  cliff,  tornadoes  and  water- 
spouts often  retreat  into  the  clouds,  and  buildings  also  tend  to  reduce 
ground  level  damage.  Thus,  forests  or  artificial  mounds  or  ridges 
might  offer  some  protection  from  tornadoes,  although  very  severe 
tornadoes  have  even  left  swaths  of  uprooted  trees  behind.60 

Modification  of  tornadoes  by  cloud  seeding  would  likely  bo  the  cheap- 
est and  easiest  method.  Sodium  iodide  seeding  could  possibly  shorten 
the  life  of  a  tornado  if  the  storm's  cold  air  outflow  became  stronger  and 
overtook  the  vortex  sooner,  thus  cutting  off  the  inflow.  Seeding  a 
neighboring  cell  upstream  of  the  low-level  inflow  might  also  be  bene - 


09  Davies-Jones  and  Kessler,  "Tornadoes,"  1974,  p.  590. 
»  Ibid. 


115 


ficial,  if  the  rapidly  developing  seeded  cloud,  competing  for  warm, 
moist  air,  reduces  the  inflow  and  weakens  the  rotating  updraft.  It  is 
also  possible  that  seeding  would  increase  low-level  convergence,  lead- 
ing to  intensification  of  a  tornado.61 
Davies- Jones  and  Kessler  conclude  that : 

Any  efforts  to  modify  a  severe  storm  with  potential  or  actual  tornadoes 
obviously  will  have  to  be  carried  out  with  extreme  caution  *  *  *.  Actual  modifica- 
tion attempts  on  menacing  tornadoes  are  probably  several  years  away.  In  the 
meantime,  we  should  seek  improved  building  codes  and  construction  practices 
and  continue  research  into  the  actual  morphology  of  convective  vortices.62 

In  spite  of  the  speculations  on  how  tornadoes  might  be  modified,  no 
tests  have  yet  been  conducted.  The  small  size  and  brief  lifetime  of  tor- 
nadoes make  them  difficult  and  expensive  to  investigate.  However,  in 
view  of  their  destructiveness,  they  must  be  given  more  attention  by 
meteorologists,  who  should  seek  ways  to  mitigate  their  effects.  Only 
further  research  into  the  character  of  tornadoes,  followed  by  careful 
investigation  of  means  of  suppressing  them,  can  lead  to  this  desired 
reduction  in  the  effects  of  tornadoes. 

Technical  Problem  Areas  in  Planned  Weather  Modification 

In  this  section  a  number  of  major  problem  areas  associated  with  the 
development  of  weather  modification  technology  will  be  addressed. 
These  topics  are  not  necessarily  confined  to  the  modification  of  any  one 
of  the  weather  phenomena  discussed  in  the  previous  section  but  apply 
in  general  to  a  number  of  these  categories  of  phenomena.  Some  of  the 
problem  areas  have  implications  which  extend  beyond  the  purely 
technical  aspects  of  planned  weather  modification,  bearing  also  on 
social,  economic,  and  legal  aspects  as  well.  Included  are  discussions  on 
the  problems  of  seeding  technology,  evaluation  of  results  of  weather 
modification  projects,  extended  area  and  extended  time  effects  from 
advertent  weather  modification,  and  potential  approaches  to  weather 
and  climate  modification  which  involve  techniques  other  than  seeding. 
The  problems  of  inadvertent  weather  modification  and  of  potential 
ecological  effects  from  planned  weather  modification  could  also  prop- 
erly be  included  in  this  section ;  however,  these  topics  are  addressed  in 
chapter  4  and  13,  respectively,  in  view  of  their  special  significance. 

seeding  techonology 

In  recent  years  there  has  been  progress  in  developing  a  variety  of 
ice-nucleating  agents  available  for  cloud  seeding,  although  silver  iodide 
continues  to  be  the  principal  material  used.  Other  seeding  agents  which 
have  been  studied  include  lead  iodide,  metaldehyde,  urea,  and  copper 
sulfide.  Nucleants  have  been  dispensed  into  the  clouds  from  both 
ground-based  generators  or  from  aircraft.  In  some  foreign  countries, 
such  as  the  Soviet.  Union,  rockets  or  artillery  have  been  used  to  place 
the  seeding  material  into  selected  regions  of  the  clouds;  however,  this 
means  of  delivery  does  not  seem  to  be  acceptable  in  the  United  States. 

There  have  been  both  difficulties  and  conflicting  claims  regarding  the 
targeting  of  seeding  materials,  particularly  from  groimd  generators, 
ever  since  the  earliest  days  of  cloud  seeding.  It  is  always  hoped  that 

ft  Ibid.,  pp.  590-591. 
«a  Ibid.,  p.  591. 


116 


the  nucleant  will  be  transported  from  the  generator  site  by  advection, 
convection,  and  diffusion  to  parts  of  the  clouds  which  have  been  iden- 
tified for  modification.  Difficulties  have  been  observed  under  unstable 
conditions,  where  the  plume  of  nucleants  was  disrupted  and  wide  angle 
turbulent  diffusion  was  severe.  Valley  locations  in  mountainous  areas 
are  often  subjected  also  to  inversions  and  to  local  channeling  so  that 
trajectory  determinations  are  extremely  difficult.  Even  plumes  of  seed- 
ing material  from  aircraft  have  shown  an  erratic  pattern.  The  prob- 
lems of  irregular  plume  goemetry  appear  to  increase  as  distortion 
occurs  near  fronts  in  mountain  terrain,  that  is,  under  just  the  circum- 
stances where  cloud  seeding  is  often  attempted.63 

In  view  of  the  limited  vertical  transport  of  silver  iodide  observed 
in  some  studies  (that  is,  up  to  450  meters  above  the  terrain  at  distances 
of  several  kilometers  from  the  generators),  some  have  concluded 
that,  under  conditions  of  the  tests,  ground-based  generators  are 
probably  not  effective.  However,  other  studies  have  shown  that  one 
cannot  generalize  that  ground  generators  are  not  always  effective. 
Thus,  more  desirable  effects  can  be  achieved  with  generators  at  high 
altitudes  where  there  is  little  chance  of  inversion  trapping  of  the 
silver  iodide  as  in  other  tests.64 

Much  of  the  ambiguity  associated  with  ground-based  generators  is 
reduced  when  the  nucleant  material  is  placed  into  the  cloud  directly 
by  an  aircraft  using  flares  or  rockets.  However,  airborne  seeding  also 
presents  important  targeting  problems.  Of  course,  targeting  difficul- 
ties are  reduced  in  the  case  of  single  cloud  seeding,  where  the  aircraft 
is  flying  directly  beneath  the  cloud  in  the  active  updraft  area.  How- 
ever, questions  of  proper  vortical  ascent  persist  when  the  objective  is 
to  lay  down  from  the  aircraft  an  elevated  layer  of  nucleant-rich  air 
that  is  intended  to  drift  over  the  target  area.65 

In  conclusion,  the  1973  National  Academy  of  Sciences  study  says : 

To  summarize  the  results  of  the  past  few  years'  work  on  targeting,  it  can  he  said 
that  earlier  dobuts  about  the  inevitability  of  nuclei  reaching  effective  altitudes 
from  ground  generators  tend  to  be  supported  by  a  number  of  recent  observational 
studies.  Some  of  these  merely  confirm  the  rather  obvious  prediction  that  stable 
lapse  rates  will  be  unfavorable  to  the  efficacy  of  ground  generators ;  others  indi- 
cate surprising  lack  of  vertical  ascent  under  conditions  that  one  might  have 
expected  to  favor  substantial  vertical  transport.  The  recent  work  also  tends  to 
support  the  view  that  plumes  from  ground  generators  in  mountainous  terrain 
must  be  expected  to  exhibit  exceedingly  complex  behavior ;  and  each  site  must 
be  expected  to  have  its  own  peculiarities  with  respect  to  plume  transport.  Tracking 
experiments  become  an  almost  indispensable  feature  of  seeding  trials  or  operations 
in  such  cases.66 

There  are  three  types  of  airborne  seeding  agent  delivery  systems  in 
common  use — burners,  flares,  and  hoppers.  Burners  are  used  mainly 
for  horizontal  seeding,  often  at  the  cloud  base  as  discussed  above.  Poly- 
technic flares  are  of  two  types — those  used  in  vertical  drops,  similar  to 
a  shotgun  shell  or  flare-pistol  cartridge,  and  the  end-burning  type, 
similar  to  warning  flares.  The  flares  contain  silver  iodide  with  or  with- 
out an  auxiliary  oxydizer,  such  as  potassium  nitrate,  together  with 
aluminum,  magnesium,  and  synthetic  resin  binder.  Dropping  flares  are 

68  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Research  Council,  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  Washington,  D.C.. 
1973.  pp.  115-16. 

61  Ibid.,  p.  117. 

85  Ibid.,  pp.  118,  120. 

M  Ibid.,  pp.  119-120. 


117 


intended  to  be  dropped  into  updrafts  and  to  seed  the  cloud  over  a  verti- 
cal depth  as  great  as  a  kilometer,  while  burner  seeding  is  intended  to  be 
more  controlled  and  gradual.  Hoppers  dispense  materials  in  solid  form, 
such  as  the  particles  of  dry  ice  crushed  and  dropped  into  clouds  and 
cold  fogs.  For  warm  fog  and  cloud  modification  hoppers  are  used  to 
dispense  dry  salt  or  urea.  Sometimes  these  materials  are  pumped  in  a 
solution  to  nozzles  in  the  wings,  where  the  wingtip  vortices  help  mix 
the  agent  into  the  air.67 

On  the  ground  there  are  a  number  of  seeding  modes  which  are  fre- 
quently used,  and  types  of  nucleants  used  with  ground-based  genera- 
tors are  commonly  of  two  types — a  complex  of  silver  iodide  and  sodium 
iodide  or  of  silver  iodide  and  ammonium  iodide.  Outputs  from  the  gen- 
erator are  usually  from  6  to  20  grams  per  hour,  although  generators 
with  much  greater  outputs  are  used  sometimes.  One  seeding  mode  in- 
volves dispensing  continuously  into  the  airstream  from  a  ground  gen- 
erator at  a  fixed  point,  the  approach  used  most  commonly  in  mountain- 
ous terrain.  If  the  generator  is  located  in  flat  country  at  temperatures 
above  freezing,  the  nucleation  level  is  reached  through  entrainment  of 
the  material  into  the  convection.68 

The  nucleating  effectiveness  of  silver  iodide  smoke  is  dependent  upon 
the  cloud  temperature,  where  the  colder  the  temperature  the  greater  is 
the  number  of  ice  crystals  formed  per  gram  of  silver  iodide.  Tests  of 
nucleating  effectiveness  are  made  in  the  Colorado  State  University 
cloud  simulation  facility,  where  the  nucleant  is  burned  in  a  vertical 
wind  tunnel  and  a  sample  of  the  aerosol  is  collected  in  a  syringe  and 
nucleant  density  calculated  from  the  pyrotechnic  burn  rate  and  the 
tunnel  flow  rate.  The  syringe  sample  is  diluted  with  clean,  dry  air  and 
injected  into  a  precooled  isothermal  cold  chamber  containing  cloud 
droplets  atomized  from  distilled  water.  Ice  crystals  which  grow  and 
settle  out  are  collected  on  microscopic  slides,  so  that  nucleating  effec- 
tiveness can  be  calculated  as  the  ratio  of  concentrated  crystals  detected 
to  the  mass  of  nucleating  material  in  the  air  sample.69 

As  part  of  the  preparations  for  the  1976  seeding  operations  in  the 
Florida  area  cumulus  experiment  (FACE)  of  the  National  Oceanic 
and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA),  Sax  et  al.,  carefully 
evaluated  the  silver  iodide  effectiveness  of  different  flares  used  in 
FACE.  The  results  of  these  effectiveness  studies,  conducted  with  the 
Colorado  State  University  facility,  are  shown  in  figure  14.  It  was  dis- 
covered that  a  newly  acquired  airborne  flare,  denoted  as  NEI  TB-1 
in  the  figure,  was  considerably  more  effective  than  both  the  Navy 
flares  used  earlier  and  another  commercially  available  flare  (Olin 
WM-105).  The  superiority  of  the  NEI  TB-1  material  at  warmer 
temperatures  is  particularly  noteworthy.70  In  another  paper,  Sax, 
Thomas,  and  Bonebrake  observe  that  crystalline  ice  concentrations  in 
clouds  seeded  in  FACE  during  1976  with  the  NEI  flares  greatly 
exceeded  those  found  in  clouds  seeded  during  1975  with  Navy  flares. 

67  Ruskin,  R.  E.  and  W.  D.  Scott,  "Weather  Modification  Instruments  and  Their  Use." 
In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  pp. 
193-194. 

68  Elliott,  Robert  D.,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector."  In  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.), 
"Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wilev,  1974,  p.  57. 

09  Sax,  Robert  I..  Dennis  M.  Garvey,  Farn  P.  Parungo,  and  Tom  W.  Slusher,  "Characteris- 
tics of  the  Agl  Nucleant  Used  in  NOAA's  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment."  In  preprints 
of  the  "Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,"  Champaign, 
111.,  Oct.  10-13.  1977.  American  Meteorological  Society,  Boston,  1977,  p.  198. 

70  Ibid.,  pp.  198-201. 


118 


They  conclude  that,  if  differences  in  sampling  time  intervals  and  effects 
of  instrumentation  housing  can  be  ignored,  there  is  indicated  a  much 
greater  nucleation  effectiveness  for  the  XEI  flares  which  were  used 
predominantly  after  July  1975.71  The  implications  of  this  result  are 
very  far  reaching,  since  the  borderline  and/or  slightly  negative  results 
of  many  previous  experiments  and  operational  projects1  can  possibly 
be  laid  to  the  ineffectiveness  of  the  silver  iodide  flares  previously 
used. 


0        -5        -10       -15  -20 
CLOUD  TEMPERATURECC.) 


Figure  14. — Effectiveness  of  various  silver  iodide  flares  in  providing  artificial 
nuclei  as  a  function  of  cloud  temperature.  The  principal  comparison  is  between 
the  XEI  TB-1  and  the  Navy  TB-1  flares  (see  text)  ;  the  curve  of  mean  data  for 
the  Olin  WM-105  flares  is  included  for  comparison.  The  curves  show  that  the 
XEI  flares,  used  In  FACE  in  late  1975  and  1976  were  significantly  more  effec- 
tive in  producing  nuclei  at  warmer  temperatures  just  below  freezing.  ( From 
Sax,  Garvey,  Parungo,  and  Slusher,  1977.) 


EVALUATION  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  PROJECTS 

There  has  been  much  emphasis  on  evaluation  methodology  on  the 
part  of  weather  modification  meteorologists  and  statisticians,  partic- 
ularly with  regard  to  precipitation  modification.  Progress  in  this 


71  Sax.  Robert  I..  Jack  Thomas.  Marilyn  Bonebrake.  "Differences  in  Evolution  of  Ice 
Within  Seeded  and  Nonseeded  Florida  Cumuli  as  a  Function  of  Nucleating  Agent."  In  pre- 
prints of  the  "Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification. "  Cham- 
paign, 111.,  Oct.  10-13,  1977.  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977,"  pp.  203-205. 


119 


area  has  been  slow,  owing  to  the  complexity  of  verification  problems 
and  to  inadequate  understanding  of  cloud  physics  and  dynamics. 

Having  reviewed  previous  considerations  of  evaluation  attempts, 
Changnon  discovered  a  wide  variety  of  results  and  interpretations, 
noting  that  "a  certain  degree  of  this  confusion  has  occurred  because 
the  methods  being  used  were  addressed  to  different  purposes  and 
audiences,  and  because  there  has  been  no  widely  accepted  method  of 
verification  among  investigators."  72  He  continues : 

For  instance,  if  one  considers  identification  of  changes  in  the  precipitation 
processes  most  important  to  verification  of  modification  efforts,  then  he  will 
often  undertake  evaluation  using  a  physical-dynamic  meteorological  approach. 
If  he  considers  statistical  proof  of  surface  precipitation  changes  the  best  method, 
he  may  concentrate  verification  solely  on  a  statistical  approach  or  make  in- 
adequate use  of  the  physical  modeling  concepts.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  evalua- 
tion is  to  satisfy  the  public,  the  consumer,  or  the  governmental  decision-maker, 
it  must  be  economic-oriented  also.  Hence,  a  review  of  the  subject  of  previous 
evaluation  methodology  must  be  constantly  viewed  with  these  different  goals 
and  concepts  in  mind.73 

Evaluation  methodology  for  weather  modification  must  deal  with 
three  fundamental  problems  which  Changnon  has  identified : 74 

1.  There  are  many  degrees  of  interaction  among  atmospheric  forces 
that  result  in  enormous  variability  in  natural  precipitation,  greatly 
restricting  attempts  for  controlled  experiments  that  are  attainable 
in  other  physical  and  engineering  sciences. 

2.  There  is  an  absolute  need  to  evaluate  weather  modification  with 
statistical  procedures;  this  requirement- will  exist  until  all  underlying 
physical  principles  of  weather  modification  can  be  explained. 

3.  The  data  used  in  the  evaluation  must  be  sufficiently  adequate  in 
space  and  time  over  an  experimental  region  to  overcome  and  describe 
the  natural  variability  factors,  so  that  a  significant  statistical  signal 
may  be  obtained  within  the  noise  of  the  variability. 

It  is  further  recognized  that  analysis  of  weather  modification  ex- 
periments is  closely  akin  to  the  weather  prediction  problem,  since 
evaluation  of  weather  modification  efforts  is  dependent  on  a  com- 
parison of  a  given  weather  parameter  with  an  estimate  of  what  would 
have  happened  to  the  parameter  naturally.  Thus,  the  better  the  pre- 
diction of  natural  events,  the  better  can  a  weather  modification  proj- 
ect be  designed  and  evaluated,  at  the  same  time  reducing  the  verifica- 
tion time  required  by  a  purely  statistical  approach.75 

Initially,  weather  modification  evaluation  techniques  used  only  the 
observational  or  "look  and  see"  approach,  improved  upon  subsequently 
by  the  "percent  of  normal"  approach,  in  which  precipitation  during 
seeding  was  compared  with  normals  of  the  pre-experimental  period. 
Later,  using  fixed  target  and  control  area  data  comparisons,  regres- 
sion techniques  were  attempted,  but  the  high  variability  of  precipita- 
tion in  time  and  space  made  such  approaches  inapplicable.  In  the 
mid-1960's  there  was  a  shift  in  sophisticated  experiments  toward 
use  of  randomization.  In  a  randomized  experiment,  seeding  events 
are  selected  according  to  some  objective  criteria,  and  the  seeding 
agent  is  applied  or  withheld  in  sequential  events  or  adjacent  areas 

72  Changnon.  Stanley  A..  Jr..  "A  Review  of  Methods  to  Evaluate  Precipitation  Modifica- 
tion in  North  America."  Proceedings  of  the  WMO/IAMAP  Scientific  Conference  on  Weather 
Modification.  Tashkent.  U.S.S.R..  Oct.  1-7,  1973,  World  Meteorological  Organization. 
WMO— No.  399.  Geneva,  1974,  p.  397. 

73  Ibid.,  p.  398. 

74  Ibid. 

75  Ibid. 


120 


in  accordance  with  a  random  selection  scheme.  An  inherent  problem 
with  randomization  is  the  length  of  experimental  time  required; 
consequently,  the  approach  is  not  often  satisfying  to  those  who  wish 
to  obtain  maximum  precipitation  from  all  possible  rain  events  or 
those  who  want  to  achieve  results  in  what  appears  to  be  the  most 
economical  manner.  As  a  result,  commercial  projects  seldom  make 
use  of  randomization  for  evaluation,  and  such  techniques  are  gen- 
erally reserved  for  research  experiments.76 

In  very  recent  years  the  randomization  approach,  which  to  many 
appeared  to  be  too  "statistical"  and  not  sufficiently  meteorological 
in  character,  has  been  improved  on  through  a  better  understanding 
of  atmospheric  processes,  so  that  a  physical-statistical  approach  has 
been  adopted.77 

Changnon  reviewed  approximately  100  precipitation  modification 
projects  in  North  America  and  found  essentiallv  6  basic  methods 
that  have  been  employed  in  project  evaluations.  He  identified  these 
as  (1)  direct  observation  (usually  for  single  element  seeding  trials), 
(2)  one-area  continuous  with  no  randomization  (involving  historical 
and/or  spatial  evaluation),  (3)  one-area  randomization,  (4)  target- 
control  area  comparisons,  (5)  cross-over  with  randomization,  and 
(6)  miscellaneous.78  These  methods,  along  with  the  kinds  of  data 
which  have  been  used  with  each,  are  listed  in  table  9. 

TABLE  9.— REVIEW  OF  EVALUATION  METHODS  FOR  PRECIPITATION  MODIFICATION  AND  TYPES  OF  DATA 

EMPLOYED 

(From  Changnon,  "A  Review  of  Methods  to  Evaluate  Precipitation  Modification  in  North  America,"  1974] 


Methods 


Surface 

precipitation  data 


Meteorological 
elements  data 


Geophysical- 
economic  data 


Direct  observation  Change  in  type;  duration 

of  precioitation;  areal 
distribution  (vs.  model) 

One-area  continu-     Historical  Area-rain  regressions; 

ous  (nonrandom).  weekend-weekday 

rainfall  differences; 
frequency  of  rain 
days. 

Spatial   Area-rain  regressions; 

pattern  recognition; 
trend  surfaces;  rain 
rates;  raindrop  sizes; 
frequency  of  rain 
days;  rain  cell  differ- 
ences; precipitation 
type  change;  areal 
extent  of  rain. 

Target  control  Area  rainfall  (day, 

month,  season)  repres- 
sions; area  snowfall 
(day,  month,  season). 
One-area  ran-  Basically  Area  precipitation; 

domized  (hours        statistical.  plume  area  precipi- 

pulsed).  tation:  change  in  pre- 

cipitation type.  Period 
Physical  plus         precipitation;  echo 
statistical.         area;  rain  rates;  echo 
reflectivity;  rain 
initiation. 

Crossover  ran-  Area  rainfall;  zonal 

dnmized.  rainfall. 

Miscellaneous  (post  

hoc  stratifica- 
tions). 


Cloud  parameters;  echo 
parameters;  seed  and 
plume. 

Frequency  of  severe        Added  runoff;  crop 
weather;  frequency         yields;  ecological, 
of  smoke  days. 


Synoptic  weather  con-     Runoff  increases;  crop 
ditions;  cloud  parame-     yields;  ecological, 
ters;  echo  parameters; 
Agl  plums;  nuclei 
sources;  airflow- 
plume  behaviors; 
tracers  in  rain;  atmos- 
pheric electrical 
properties. 

Echo  parameters  Runoff  regressions. 


Synoptic  weather  con- 
ditions; cloud  parame- 
ters; seed  material  in 
plumes.  Fcho  parame- 
ters; Agl  in  rain;  cloud 
numerical  models; 
storm  behavior; 
cloud  base  rain  rate. 

Synoptic  types  and 
upper  air  conditions. 

Upper  air: 

1.  Temperature. 

2.  Winds. 

3.  Moisture  stability 

indices. 
Synoptic  weather  types. 


Water  yield;  runoff; 
ecosystem  (plant  and 
animals)  and  erosion; 
avalanche— disbene- 
fits. 


76  Ibid.,  p.  399. 

77  Ibid.,  p.  400. 

78  Ibid.,  p.  407. 


121 


The  direct  observation  technique  was  the  first  major  approach  to 
evaluation  and  is  still  used  occasionally.  In  addition  to  direct  observa- 
tion of  the  change  and  type  of  precipitation  at  the  surface,  the  time  of 
precipitation  initiation,  and  areal  distribution  following  treatment  of 
a  cloud  or  cloud  group,  other  meteorological  elements  have  been  ob- 
served ;  these  include  radar  echo  characteristics,  plume  of  the  seeding 
material,  and  cloud  parameters  (microphysical  properties  and  dynam- 
ical and  dimensional  properties  such  as  updrafts,  cloud  size,  and  rate 
of  growth.).79 

The  one-area  continuous  (nonrandomized)  techniques  have  been 
employed  to  evaluate  many  of  the  commercially  funded  projects  in 
North  America,  recent  efforts  to  investigate  inadvertent  precipitation 
modification  by  large  urban-industrial  areas,  and  the  statewide  South 
Dakota  seeding  program.  This  category  includes  the  largest  number 
of  projects,  and  control  data  for  these  nonrandomized  projects  have 
included  both  historical  data  and  data  from  surrounding  areas.  The 
uncertainty  of  the  control  data  as  a  predictor  of  target  data  is  the  basic 
problem  in  using  this  approach.80 

*  Most  federally  sponsored  weather  modification  projects  have  used 
the  one-area  randomization  method,  which  involves  the  use  of  a  variety 
of  precipitation  elements,  including  duration,  number  of  storms,  and 
storm  days  and  months.  Projects  evaluated  with  this  method  fall  into 
two  categories,  including,  as  shown  in  table  9,  those  using  the  basic 
statistical  approach  and  the  more  recent  physical  plus  statistical  tech- 
niques. The  latter  group  of  projects  have  been  based  on  a  greater 
knowledge  of  cloud  and  storm  elements,  using  this  information  in 
defining  seedable  events  and  combining  it  with  statistical  tests  to  detect 
effects.  Surface  data,  including  rainfall  rates  and  area  mean  rainfall 
differences,  are  used  to  evaluate  such  one-area  randomized  projects.81 

The  target-control  method  involves  a  single  area  that  is  seeded  on 
a  randomized  basis  and  one  or  more  nearby  control  areas  that  are  never 
seeded  and,  presumably,  are  not  affected  by  the  seeding.82  The  method 
had  been  used  in  about  10  North  American  projects  through  1974. 
Evaluation  data  have  been  mostly  area  rainfall  or  snowfall  regres- 
sions, runoff  differences,  and  radar  echo  parameter  changes.83 

The  crossover  (with  randomization)  method  has  been  considered 
by  many  to  be  the  most  sophisticated  of  the  statistical  evaluation 
methods.  The  crossover  design  includes  two  areas,  only  one  of  which 
is  seeded  at  a  time,  with  the  area  for  seeding  selected  randomly  for 
each  time  period.  As  with  the  target-control  method,  a  problem  arises 
in  this  method  in  that  there  is  the  possibility  of  contamination  of  the 
control  areas  from  the  seeded  area.84  In  the  single  project  to  which  the 
method  had  been  applied  up  to  1974,  the  evaluation  procedure  involved 
classification  of  potential  treatment  events  according  to  meteorological 
conditions,  followed  by  area  and  subarea  rainfall  comparisons.85  The 

so  Ibid.,  pp.  408-409. 

81  Ibid.,  p.  409.  „  .   „  T 

82  Brier.  Glenn  W.  "Design  and  Evaluation  of  Weather  Modification  Experiments.  In 
Wilroot  N.  Hess  (editor),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York.  Wiley,  iy74. 

P'  safhangnon.  "A  Review  of  Methods  To  Evaluate  Precipitaiton  Modification  in  North 
America."  1974.  p.  409.  ,       .   „'     Wil  01A 

84  Brier.  "Desiern  and  Evaluation  of  Weather  Modification  Experiments.   1974.  p.  210. 

ssChangnon.  "A  Review  of  Methods  To  Evaluate  Precipitation  Modification  in  Nortn 
America,"  1974,  p.  409. 


122 


miscellaneous  methods  in  table  9  refer  basically  to  evaluation  efforts 
that  have  occurred  after  but  generally  within  the  context  of  the  five 
methods  mentioned  above,  and  have  been  largely  post-hoc  stratifica- 
tions of  results  classified  according  to  various  meteorological  subdivi- 
sions, followed  by  re-analysis  of  the  surface  rainfall  data  based  on 
these  stratifications.86 

TABLE  10.-REVIEW  OF  EVALUATION  METHODS  FOR  HAIL  MODIFICATION  AND  TYPES  OF  DATA  EMPLOYED 
IFrom  Changnon  "A  Review  of  Methods  to  Evaluate  Precipitation  Modification  in  North  America,"  1974] 


Methods 


Surface  hail  data 


Meteorological  elements  Geophysical-economic 


Direct  observation  Cessation  of  hail;  hail  Echo  parameters;  cloud 

pattern;    hail    sizes  parameters;  Agl  in  hail. 

change;  hailstone 

character. 

One-area  continuous  Historical  Number  of  hail  days  

(non-random). 

Spatial  Number  of  hail-produc-  Radar  echo  character- 
ing clouds/unit  time;  istics. 
hailstreak  frequencies; 
number  of  hail  days; 
rainfall  characteristics; 
impact  energy;  loca- 
tion of  hail  vs.  total 
precipitation  area. 

Target-control   Energy;  hail  day  frequen-  Radar  echo  characteris- 

cy.  tics. 

One-area   random-  Impact  energy;  hail  day  Radar  echo  characteris- 

ization.  frequency;      hailf all     tics;  Agl  in  hail-rain, 

characteristics. 

Cross-over  random-  Energy;  area  of  hail;  vol-  Agl  in  hail, 

ized.  ume  of  hail. 


Crop-hail  loss  (insurance); 
insurance  ratej. 
Crop-hail  loss  (insurance) 


Hail  loss  (insurance). 

Ecosystem  (Agl);  crop- 
loss  data. 


About  20  projects  concerned  with  hail  modification  were  also  ana- 
lyzed by  Changnon  with  regard  to  the'  evaluation  techniques  used.  The 
five  methods  used,  shown  in  table  10,  include  the  first  five  methods 
listed  in  table  9  and  discussed  above  for  precipitation  modification 
evaluation.  A  comparison  of  tables  9  and  10  reveals  that  the  evaluation 
of  rain  and  snow  modification  projects  uses  much  less  variety  of  kinds 
of  data,  especially  the  meteorological  elements.  The  evaluation  of  hail 
projects  is  largely  statistical,  owing  to  the  lack  of  sophistication  in  the 
physical  modelling  of  hailstorms.  There  has  been  greater  use  of  eco- 
nomic data  in  hail  evaluation,  however,  than  in  evaluation  of  rainfall 
projects,  due  to  some  extent  to  the  lack  of  surface  hail  data  in  weather 
records  and  the  consequent  need  to  make  use  of  crop  insurance  data.87 

In  hail  evaluation,  the  direct  observation  method  has  been  used  to 
look  at  physical  effects  from  seeding  individual  storms  and  storm 
systems,  involving  analysis  of  time  changes  in  surface  hail  parameters, 
radar  echo  characteristics,  and  cloud  properties.  The  one-area  contin- 
uous (non-random)  method  has  been  the  principal  one  used  in  com- 
mercial hail  projects  and  in  studies  of  inadvertent  urban-industrial 
effects  on  hail,  using  historical  and/or  spatial  data  in  the  evaluation. 
One  major  data  form  in  these  evaluations  is  the  crop-hail  loss  from 
insurance  data.  The  target-control  method  has  made  use  of  hail  fall 
enerjry,  hail-day  frequencies,  and  crop-hail  loss  as  evaluation  data.88 

»  Ibid. 

87  IMd.,  pp.  412-413. 

88  Ibid.,  p.  413. 


123 


The  one-area  randomization  method  is  the  method  used  in  the  Na- 
tional Hail  Research  Experiment.89  Various  degrees  of  randomization 
have  been  used,  ranging  from  50-50  to  80-20 ;  however,  the  evaluation 
data  have  been  similar  to  those  used  in  other  methods.  Silver  concen- 
trations in  samples  of  rain  and  hail  and  elsewhere  in  the  ecosystem 
have  been  used  as  evaluation  criteria.  The  crossover  randomized 
method  of  evaluation  has  also  been  applied  to  hail  projects,  using  such 
data  as  areal  comparisons  of  impact  energy,  area  extent  of  hail,  and 
total  hail  volume,  noting  also  the  concentrations  of  seeding  material 
in  the  hailstones.90 

A  necessary  part  of  any  evaluation  scheme  involves  the  measurement 
or  estimation  of  the  amounts  of  precipitation  fallen  over  a  given  area 
following  seeded  or  control  storm  events.  Such  measurement  is  part  of 
a  more  general  requirement  as  well  in  collecting  data  for  validation 
of  weather  predictions,  development  of  prediction  models,  compilation 
of  climatic  records,  and  forecasting  of  streamrlowT  and  water  resources. 
Although  the  customary  approach  to  precipitation  measurement  has 
been  to  use  an  array  of  rain  gages,  weather  radars  have  proven  to  be 
useful  tools  for  studying  generally  the  spatial  structure  of  precipita- 
tion. Depending  on  the  quality  of  the  onsite  radar  system  calibration, 
there  have  been  varying  degrees  of  success,  however,  in  use  of  this 
tool.  Often  radar  and  rain  gage  data  are  combined  in  order  to  obtain 
the  best  estimate  of  precipitation  over  a  given  area.  In  this  arrange- 
ment, the  radar  is  used  to  specify  the  spatial  distribution  and  the 
gauges  are  used  to  determine  the  magnitude  of  the  precipitation.91 
.  Exclusive  use  of  rain  gauges  in  a  target  area  in  evaluation  of  con- 
nective precipitation  modification  projects  requires  a  high  gauge  den- 
sity to  insure  adequate  spatial  resolution.  For  a  large  target  area,  such 
an  array  would  be  prohibitively  expensive,  however,  so  that  weather 
radars  are  often  used  in  such  experiments.  The  radar  echos,  which 
provide  estimates  of  precipitation,  are  calibrated  against  a  relatively 
smaller  number  of  rain  gages,  located  judiciously  in  the  target  area 
to  permit  this  calibration. 

It  has  been  shown  that  adjusted  radar  estimates  are  sometimes 
superior  to  either  the  radar  or  the  gages  alone.  Furthermore,  the  best 
areal  estimates  are  obtained  using  a  calibration  factor  which  varies 
spatially  over  the  precipitation  field  rather  than  a  single  average 
adjustment.  Erroneous  adjustment  factors  may  be  obtained,  however, 
if  precipitation  in  the  vicinity  of  the  calibration  gage  is  so  highly 
variable  that  the  gage  value  does  not  represent  the'  precipitation 
being  sampled  by  the  radar.  The  technique  for  calculating  the  adjust- 
ment factor  typically  involves  dividing  the  gage  measurement  by  the 
summed  rainfall  estimates  inferred  from  the  radar,  to  obtain  the 
ratio,  G/E,  used  subsequently  to  adjust  radar  estimates  over  a  greater 
area.92 

89  The  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  is  discussed  as  part  of  the  weather  modifica- 
tion program  of  the  Natonal  Science  Foundation,  ch.  5,  p.  274ff. 

90  Changnon,  "A  Review  of  Methods  To  Evaluate  Precipitation  Modification  in  North 
America,"  1974,  p.  413. 

91  Crane,  Robert  K.,  "Radar  Calibration  and  Radar-rain  Gauge  Comparisons."  In  pre- 
prints of  the  "Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,"  Cham- 
paign, 111.,  Oct.  10-13,  1977.  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society,  1977,  p.  369. 

92  Klazura,  Gerald  E.,  "Changes  in  Gage/radar  Ratios  in  High  Rain  Gradients  by  Varying 
the  Location  and  Size  of  Radar  Comparison  Area."  In  preprints  of  the  "Sixth  Conference 
on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,"  Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  10-13,  1977. 
Boston,  American  Meterological  Society,  1977,  p.  376. 


124 


In  the  evaluation  of  hail  suppression  experiments,  or  measurements 
of  hailfall  in  general,  there  must  be  some  means  of  determining  the 
extent  and  the  magnitude  of  the  hail.  One  technique  is  to  use  a  net- 
work of  surface  instruments  called  hailpads.  Since  single  storms  can 
lay  down  hail  swaths  up  to  100  kilometers  long  and  tens  of  kilometers 
wide,  made  up  of  smaller  patches  called  "hailstreaks,"  the  spacings  of 
hailpads  must  be  reduced  to  a  few  hundred  meters  to  collect  quantita- 
tive data  over  small  areas.  Even  over  small  distances  of  the  order  of 
1  kilometer,  it  has  been  discovered  that  total  numbers  of  hailstones, 
hail  mass,  and  hail  kinetic  energy  can  vary  by  over  a  factor  of  10.93 
Another  means  of  estimating  hailfall  is  through  use  of  crop- damage 
studies.  Such  results  are  obtained  through  crop-loss  insurance  data, 
aerial  photography  of  damaged  fields,  and  combinations  of  these  data 
with  hailpad  measurements.94 

EXTENDED  AREA  EFFECTS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

The  term  "extended  area  effects"  refers  to  those  unplanned  changes 
to  weather  phenomena  which  occur  outside  a  target  area  as  a  result  of 
activities  intended  to  modify  the  weather  within  the  specified  target 
area.  Such  effects  have  also  been  called  by  a  variety  of  other  names 
such  as  "downwind  effects,"  "large-scale  effects,"  "extra-area  effects," 
"off-target  effects,"  and  "total-area  effects."  When  the  time  dimen- 
sion is  considered,  those  changes  which  occur,  or  are  thought  to  have 
occurred,  either  within  the  spatial  bounds  of  the  target  area  or  in 
the  extended  area  after  the  intended  effects  of  the  seeding  should 
have  taken  place  are  referred  to  as  "extended  time  effects."  These 
inadvertent  consequences  are  usually  attributed  either  to  the  transport 
of  seeding  material  beyond  the  area  intended  to  be  seeded  or  the 
lingering  of  such  material  beyond  the  time  during  which  it  was  to  be 
effective. 

In  a  number  of  experiments  there  have  been  indications  that  an 
extended  area  effect  occurred.  The  present  state  of  understanding  does 
not  permit  an  explanation  of  the  nature  of  these  effects  nor  have  the 
experimental  designs  provided  sufficient  information  to  describe  their 
extent  adequately.  The  subject  is  in  need  of  additional  study,  with 
experiments  designed  to  provide  more  specific  data  over  pertinent 
areal  and  time  scales.  In  recent  years  two  conferences  on  extended 
area  effects  of  cloud  seeding  have  been  convened.  The  first  conference, 
attended  by  18  atmospheric  scientists,  was  held  in  Santa  Barbara, 
Calif.,  in  1971  and  was  organized  by  Prof.  L.  O.  Grant  of  Colorado 
State  University  and  by  Kobert  D.  Elliott  and  Keith  J.  Brown  of 
North  American  Weather  Consultants.  Attendees  at  the  1971  seminar 
discussed  existing  evidence  of  extended  area  effects,  considered  the 
possible  means  of  examining  detailed  mechanisms  responsible  for 
the  effects,  and  debated  the  implications  for  atmospheric  water  re- 
sources management. 

A  second  workshop  was  held,  under  the  sponsorship  of  the  National 

63  Morgan,  Griffith  M.  and  Nell  G.  Towery.  "Surface  Hall  Studies  for  Weather  Modifica- 
tion." In  preprints  of  the  "Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modi- 
fication," Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  10-13,  1977,  p.  384. 

»*  Ibid. 


125 


Science  Foundation,  at  Colorado  State  University,  Fort  Collins,  Colo., 
Aug.  8-12, 1977.95  The  Fort  Collins  meeting  was  attended  by  44  partici- 
pants, composed  of  social  scientists,  observationists,  physical  scientists, 
modellers,  statisticians,  and  evaluators.  The  group  was  exposed  to  a 
mass  of  data  from  various  weather  modification  projects  from  all  over 
the  world  and  proposed  to  accomplish  the  following  objectives  through 
presentations,  workshop  sessions,  and  general  discussions : 

Renew  the  deliberations  of  the  Santa  Barbara  seminar. 

Expand  the  scope  of  participation  so  as  to  integrate  and  inter- 
pret subsequent  research. 

Better  define  the  importance  of  extended  spatial,  temporal,  and 
societal  effects  of  weather  modification. 

Prepare  guidelines  and  priorities  for  future  research  direction.96 
Extended  area  effects  have  special  importance  to  the  nontechnical 
aspects  of  weather  modification.  From  deliberations  at  the  1977 
extended  area  effects  workshop  it  was  concluded  that : 

The  total-area  of  effect  concept  adds  a  new  dimension  to  an  already  complex 
analysis  of  the  potential  benefits  and  disbenefits  of  weather  modification.  A  speci- 
fied target  area  may  have  a  commonality  of  interests  such  as  a  homogeneous  crop 
in  a  farm  area  or  a  mountain  watershed  largely  controlled  by  reservoirs  built  for 
irrigation  and/or  hydroelectric  power  generation.  Socioeconomic  analysis  of  this 
situation  is  much  more  direct  than  the  consideration  of  the  total-area  of  effect 
which  may  well  extend  into  areas  completely  dissimilar  in  their  need  or  desire  for 
additional  water.  The  spatial  expansion  of  the  area  of  effect  may  increase  or  de- 
crease the  economic  and  societal  justification  for  a  weather  modification  program. 
The  political  and  legal  consideration  may  also  be  complicated  by  this  expansion  in 
scope  since  effects  will  frequently  extend  across  state  or  national  borders.81 

The  strongest  evidence  of  extended  area  effects  is  provided  by  data 
from  projects  which  involved  the  seeding  of  wintertime  storm  systems. 
Statistical  analyses  of  precipitation  measurements  from  these  projects 
suggest  an  increase  in  precipitation  during  seeded  events  of  10  to  50 
percent  over  an  area  of  several  thousand  square  kilometers.  Some  of  the 
evidence  for  these  effects,  based  mostly  on  post  hoc  analyses  of  project 
data,  appears  fairly  strong,  though  it  remains  somewhat  suggestive  and 
speculative  in  general.98 

Based  upon  two  general  kinds  of  evidence:  (1)  observational  evi- 
dence of  a  chemical  or  physical  nature  and  (2)  the  results  of  large 
scale/long-term  analyses ;  a  workshop  group  examining  the  extended 
area  effects  from  winter  orographic  cloud-seeding  projects  assembled 
the  information  in  table  11.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  quality  of  the 
evidence,  indicated  in  the  last  column  of  the  table,  varies  from  "well 
documented"  and  "good  evidence"  to  "unknown"  and  "no  documenta- 
tion available;"  however,  the  general  kinds  of  extended  area  and 
extended  time  effects  from  a  number  of  winter  projects  are  illustrated.99 

95  Brown.  Keith  J.,  Robert  D.  Elliott,  and  Max  Edelstein,  "Transactions  of  Workshop  on 
Extended  Space  and  Time  Effect  of  Weather  Modification,"  Aug.  8-12,  1977,  Fort  Collins, 
Coio  North  American  Weather  Consultants,  Goleta,  Calif.,  February  1978.  279  pp. 

«*  Ibid.,  pp.  7-9. 

67  Ibid.,  p.  13. 

68  Ibid.,  p.  10. 

"Warburton,  Joseph  A..  "Extended  Area  Effects  From  Winter-orographic  Cloud  Seeding 
Projects,"  report  of  workshop  panel.  In  Keith  J.  Brown,  et  al.  "Transactions  of  Workshop 
on  Extended  Space  and  Time  Effects  of  Weather  Modification,"  Aug.  8-12,  1977,  Fort  Col- 
lins, Colo.  North  American  Weather  Consultants,  Goleta,  Calif.,  February  1978,  pp.  137-164. 


126 


TABLE  11.— EVIDENCE  OF  EXTENDED  AREA  EFFECTS  FROM  WINTER  OROGRAPHIC  SEEDING  PROJECTS,  BASED  UPON 
EVIDENCE  FROM  (A)  OBSERVATIONS  AND  (B)  LARGE-SCALE/LONG-TERM  ANALYSES 

[From  Warburton,  19781 


A.  OBSERVATIONAL-PHYSICAL,  CHEMICAL 

Observation 

Magnitude 

Type  of  effect      of  effect           Area  of  effect  Mechanism 

Quality  of 
evidence 

Ice  crystal  anvil  production  Spatial  and 
from  dry  ice  seeding  of  time, 
cumulus    clouds,  Blu3 
Mountains,  Australia. 

Time  


Persistence  of  ice  nuclei  at 
Climax— probably  Agl  for 
days  after  seeding. 

Transport  of  Agl  from  Climax  Spatial, 
generators  to  30  km  down- 
wind. 

Silver  in  snow.Sierra  Nevada  do. 

and  Rockies— up  to  100  km 
from  generators. 


Produced  rain 
6-12  mm 
over  18-hour 
period. 

lOOXnatural 
nuclei  con- 
centration. 

30  N/liter 
(-20°  C). 

4  to  100X 
background. 


1500  km2  Cirrus  seeding  Documentation 

and  transport  needed  (is 

of  crystals  available), 
from  seeding 
with  C02. 

Unknown  Unknown   Well  documented 

(is  available). 

~40  km2  Transport  of  Few  aircraft 

nuclei.  observations. 


Pressure  reductions  in  seeded 
band  periods,  Santa  Bar- 


Cirrus  shield  produced  by 
airborne  seeding,  Warra- 
gamba,  Australia. 


Time  Max.  —2  mb. 


.do. 


Up  to  25  per- 
cent of 
seeded  days. 


Continuum  from 
generators. 


Continuum  from 

seeding 

sites  < — 1000 

km2). 
2000  km2(l 

aircraft). 


Physical  trans- 
port of  Agl 
on  hydro- 
meter's con- 
taining Agl. 
Dynamic  heat 
ing. 


Ice  crystal 
seeding  of 
lower  clouds. 


5  yr  of  observa- 
tions. 


Fair  to  moderate 
documenta- 
tion. 

Documentation 
needed  (is 
available). 


B.  RESULTS  OF  LARGE-SCALE/LONG-TERM  ANALYSES 


Projection  description    Type  of  effect 


Magnitude  of  effect    Area  of  effect 


Quality  of  evidence 


Spatial  30  percent  >  40- 

yr,  average,  3 
successive  yr. 

Time;  long-term        10  to  40  percent. 


Spatial  +25  percent. 


Victoria,  Australia,  drought 
relief— non-randomized. 

Warragamba  and  other  large- 
scale  experiments — Aus- 
tralia decrease  in  S/NS 
ratio  wth  years  of  experi- 
ment. 1 

Israel  I— randomized  north 
and  central  seeded. 


Santa  Barbara  band  seed-  do  +25  percent  (+50 

ing— randomized.  percent  in  bands). 

Santa  Barbara  storm  seeding  do  Unknown  

of  multiple  bands. 

Time  Seed/no  seed  ratios 

of  1.5  to  4  mean 
50  percent-in- 
crease. 

Spatial   Unknown  analysis 

continuing. 


35,000  km2;  conti- 
nuum from  seed- 
ing sites. 

Artifact  of  analysis.. 


6,000  km2;  conti- 
nuum from  seed- 
ing sites. 

3,000  km2;  conti- 
nuum from  seed- 
ing sites. 

Unknown  


Santa  Barbara  duration  of 
seeded/nonseeded  bands. 


Climax  and  east  to  plains  of 
Colorado  using  "homo- 
geneous" data  base  deter- 
mined by  new  synoptic 
technique. 


3,000  km2;  conti- 
nuum from  seed- 
ing sites. 

600  km*;  130  km 
east  of  Climax, 
30  to  50  km 
south  of  Denver. 


No  documentation 
available. 

Reanalysis  needed 
avoiding  ratios 
and  double  ratios. 


Reliable  records  for 
analysis. 

Moderately  well 
documented. 

Unknown. 

Good  evidence. 


Speculative. 


'Tasmania  experiment  may  confirm  artifact. 

Examination  of  data  from  summertime  convective  cloud-seeding 
projects  reveals  "more  mixed"'  results  by  comparison  with  data  from 
wintertime  projects,  when  extended  area  effects  are  considered.  This 
general  conclusion  accords  with  the  mixed  results  from  evaluations 
of  convective  cloud  seeding  within  the  target  area.  It  was  concluded 
by  participants  on  a  panel  at  the  1977  Fort  Collins  workshop  that, 
for  summertime  convective  cloud  seeding,  there  are  statistical  evi- 
dences of  both  increases  and  decreases  in  the  extended  area,  though 
there  are  a  large  number  of  nonstatistically  significant  indications. 
Table  12  was  assembled  by  the  panel  to  summarize  the  characteristics 
of  these  effects  for  each  of  the  projects  examined.1 

1  Smith.  T.  B..  "Report  of  Panel  on  Rummer  Weather  Mortification."  In  Keith  J.  Brown 
et  al.,  "Transactions  of  Workshop  on  Extended  Spare  and  Time  Effects  of  Weather  Modi- 
fication." Aug.  8-12.  1077.  Eort  Collins,  Colo.  North  American  Weather  Consultants.  Goleta. 
Calif..  February  1978.  pp.  228-326. 


127 


§52 

IS" 
net 


ra  =  5  c 
Q.  o  2  o 

a 


o 
E 

E 

TO 

5 


3  ^    s  . 

2     20J2-  §  E  co 

£     e|c>  Eo 

q    a.    a  a. 


Lu-'e 


'  00  CO  00 

00Z  CflZyjZ 

I +<  I  I  I  I  < 


E  w  °- 

M  « 


5  »=  = 
a 


>-  e 
P 


Sir 


CJ  O 


If 


00  00 


00  00 
I  I 


.5        oo  o 


E 

s 

5  £ 


coQ- 


o  o 


o  «  •» 

>  a> 
io  OX) 


h—  o-E 


2  £ 


2  I 
o  < 


128 


It  was  the  general  consensus  of  the  1977  workshop  participants 
that  seeding  can  effect  precipitation  changes  over  relatively  large 
areas  which  extend  beyond  the  typical  target  area.  Such  changes  can 
be  positive  or  negative  and  may  be  of  the  same  sign  as  the  effect  in 
the  designated  target  area  or  of  opposite  sign.  For  example,  among 
summertime  projects  considered  the  Israeli  experiment  provided  sub- 
stantial evidence  for  positive  effects  in  the  target  and  in  the  extended 
areas  (see  table  12).  Project  Whitetop  and  the  Arizona  experiment, 
on  the  other  hand,  showed  strong  evidence  of  precipitation  decreases 
in  the  target  areas,  downwind,  and  in  surrounding  areas.  The  Florida 
area  cumulus  experiment  (FACE)  revealed  significant  rainfall  in- 
creases in  the  target  area,  but  seemed  to  show  decreases  in  surround- 
ing areas,  and  the  1969-1972  South  Dakota  project  demonstrated 
negative  seeding  effects  in  the  target  area  and  positive  effects  in  ex- 
tended areas.  Of  all  projects  reviewed,  however,  and  in  view  of  all  the 
differing  results  suggested,  the  combination  of  target-  and  extended- 
area  effects  which  appears  to  have  the  least  support  is  that  combina- 
tion most  likely  to  occur  to  many  lay  people,  i.e.,  increases  in  the  tar- 
get area  with  compensating  decreases  in  some  area  "downwind" — 
the  "robbing  Peter  to  pay  Paul"  analogy.2 

Statistical  evidence  of  extended  area  and  time  effects  seems  to  be 
reasonably  common;  however,  the  mechanics  causing  these  effects 
are  not  understood.  It  appears  that  there  may  be  a  number  of  mech- 
anisms which  come  into  play,  the  dominating  ones  operating  under 
various  storm  types  and  seeding  techniques.  In  some  projects  there 
is  evidence  that  seeding  intensified  the  storm  dynamically  through 
release  of  latent  heat  of  sublimation.  In  other  cases  silver  iodide  has 
been  transported  for  distances  of  100  kilometers  downwind  of  the 
seeding  area  and  has  persisted  for  several  days  in  the  atmosphere 
after  seeding.  Also  ice  crystals  produced  from  seeding  may,  in  turn, 
seed  lower  clouds  downwind.3 

With  particular  regard  to  extended  area  or  time  effects  in  cumulus 
seeding  experiments,  Simpson  and  Dennis  have  identified  the  follow- 
ing list  of  possible  causes : 

1.  Physical  transport  of  the  seeding  agent. 

2.  Physical  transport  of  ice  crystals  produced  by  a  seeding  agent. 

3.  Changes  in  radiation  and  thermal  balance,  as  for  example,  from 
cloud  shadows  or  wetting  of  the  ground. 

4.  Evaporation  of  water  produced. 

5.  Changes  in  the  air-earth  boundary,  such  as  vegetation  changes 
over  land  or  changes  in  the  structure  of  the  ocean  boundary  layer 
following  cloud  modification. 

6.  Dynamic  effects: 

(a)  Intensified  subsidence  surrounding  the  seeded  clouds,  com- 
pensating for  invigorated  updrafts. 

(b)  Advection  or  propagation  of  intensified  cloud  systems 
which  subsequently  interact  with  orography  or  natural 
circulations. 

(c)  Cold  thunderstorm  downdrafts,  either  killing  local  convec- 
tion or  sotting  off  new  convection  cells  elsewhere. 

sp.rnwn.  et  nl.,  "Trnnsnotions  of  the  Workshop  on  Extended  Space  and  Time  Effects  of 
Weather  Mortification."  1978,  p.  11. 
'  Ihid..  p.  12. 


129 


(d)  Extended  space-time  consequences  of  enhancement  or  sup- 
pression of  severe  weather  owing  to  cumulus  modification. 

(e)  Alteration,  via  altered  convection,  of  wind  circulation  pat- 
terns and/or  their  transports  which  could  interact  with  other  cir- 
culations, perhaps  at  great  distances.4 

Kecommended  research  activities  to  further  explore  and  develop 
understanding  of  extended  area  and  extended  time  effects  of  weather 
modification  are  summarized  in  the  final  section  of  this  chapter,  along 
with  other  research  recommendations.5 

APPROACHES  TO  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  OTHER  THAN  SEEDING 

Nearly  all  of  the  techniques  discussed  earlier  for  modifying  the 
weather  involve  some  kind  of  "cloud  seeding."  The  exception  is  in  the 
case  of  warm  fog  dispersal,  where  attempts  to  dissipate  have  also 
included  mechanical  mixing  or  application  of  heat.  While  most  cloud- 
seeding  techniques  involve  the  use  of  artificial  ice  nuclei  such  as  those 
provided  by  silver  iodide  particles,  other  "seeding"  substances,  such 
as  dry  ice,  sodium  chloride,  urea,  propane,  and  water  spray,  have  been 
used  in  certain  applications.  Clouds  have  also  been  seeded  with  metal- 
ized  plastic  chaff  in  order  to  dissipate  electrical  charge  build-up  and 
reduce  the  incidence  of  lightning. 

There  may  also  be  some  promise  in  future  years  of  beneficially 
changing  the  weather,  over  both  large  and  small  scales  of  time  and 
space,  using  technologies  that  are  not  in  the  general  category  of  cloud 
seeding.  Indeed,  some  such  schemes  have  been  proposed  and  there  has 
been  research  conducted  on  a  number  of  these  possibilities. 

In  the  following  chapter  the  effects  of  man's  activities  and. some  nat- 
ural phenomena  in  changing  the  weather  unintentionally  will  be  dis- 
cussed. While  these  inadvertent  effects  may  be  of  general  concern  and 
should  be  studied  in  view  of  potential  dangers,  they  should  also 
be  understood  inasmuch  as  they  may  provide  valuable  clues  on  how 
the  atmosphere  can  be  more  efficiently  modified  for  beneficial  purposes. 
For  example,  major  heat  sources  judiciously  located  might  be  used 
to  affect  weather  in  ways  useful  to  man. 

Solution  of  problems  which  overlap  considerations  of  both  weather 
and  energy  could  be  investigated  and  solved  in  common  by  scientists 
and  engineers  working  in  both  fields.  Such  research  should  be  under- 
way and  some  practical  applications  could  be  forthcoming  during 
the  1980's.  Dissipation  of  supercooled  clouds  and  fog  over  large  and 
medium-sized  cities,  which  now  appears  to  be  technically  feasible,  may 
become  desirable  when  solar  energy  collectors  are  more  common.  Ee- 
duction  of  radiative  losses  to  space  could  be  facilitated  by  allowing 
the  clouds  to  reform  at  night.  It  is  speculated  that  this  diurnal  cycle 
of  operation  would  tend  to  weaken  inversions  that  are  often  associated 
with  fog  and  low  stratus  and  so  tend  to  alleviate  problems  of  air 
pollution,  though  there  might  be  some  increase  of  photochemical 
effects  in  the  daytime  with  additional  sunlight.6 

Excess  heat  and  moisture  from  nuclear  and  other  powerplants  and 
from  their  cooling  towers  could  be  usefully  employed  for  generating 

4  Simpson  and  Dennis,  "Cumulus  Clouds  and  Their  Modification,"  19,74,  pp.  274-277. 

5  See  p.  143. 

6  Dennis  and  Gagln,  "Recommendations  for  Future  Research  In  Weather  Modification," 
1977,  p.  79. 


130 


clouds  if  the  plants  are  optimally  located  with  regard  to  water  sources 
and  meteorological  conditions.  The  clouds  so  formed  might  be  used  for 
protection  to  crops  during  periods  of  intense  heat  or  as  a  shield  over  a 
city  at  night  to  prevent  re-radiation  of  heat  back  to  space.  The  clouds 
might  also  be  seeded  subsequently  somewhere  downwind  of  the  power- 
plant  to  enhance  precipitation. 

Recently,  Simpson  reviewed  and  summarized  the  state  of  research 
and  development  of  a  number  of  the  nonseeding  approaches  to  weather 
modification  which  have  been  proposed.7  She  discusses  effects  of 
changes  to  radiation  and  to  sea-air  interface  processes : 

Some  expensive,  brute  force  successes  have  been  obtained  by  burning  fuels  to 
clear  fogs  or  even  to  create  clouds.  A  more  ingenious  approach  is  to  use  solar  heat 
to  alter  part  of  the  air-surface  boundary  or  a  portion  of  the  free  atmosphere. 
Black  and  Tarmy  (1963)  proposed  ten  by  ten  kilometer  asphalt  ground  coatings 
to  create  a  "heat  mountain"'  to  enhance  rain,  or  to  reduce  pollution  by  breaking 
through  an  inversion.  Recently  Gray,  et  al.  (1975)  have  suggested  tapping  solar 
energy  with  carbon  dust  over  100-1,000  times  larger  areas  for  numerous  weather 
modification  objectives  ranging  from  rain  enhancement  to  snow  melt,  cirrus  pro- 
duction, and  storm  modification.  The  physical  hypotheses  have  undergone  pre- 
liminary modelling  with  promising  results,  while  the  logistics  appear  marginally 
feasible.  Drawbacks  are  the  unknown  and  uncontrollable  transport  of  the  dust 
and  its  environmental  unattractiveness. 

A  cleaner  way  of  differentially  heating  the  air  appears  to  be  a  possible  future 
byproduct  of  the  space  program.  A  Space  Solar  Power  Laboratory  is  in  the  plan- 
ning stages  at  NASA.  Its  main  purpose  is  to  provide  electric  power,  which  will 
be  sent  by  the  space  laboratory  to  the  earth's  surface.  The  microwave  power 
will  be  converted  to  DC  by  means  of  groups  of  rectifying  antennas,  which  dissi- 
pate a  fraction  of  the  power  into  heat.  Preliminary  calculations  *  *  *  indicate  that 
the  atmospheric  effect  of  the  estimated  heating  would  be  comparable  to  that  by 
a  suburban  area  and  thus  could  impact  mesoscale  processes.  Future  systems 
could  dissipate  much  more  heat  and  could  conceivably  be  a  clean  way  to  modify 
weather  processes.  It  is  not  too  soon  to  begin  numerical  simulation  of  atmospheric 
modifications  that  later  generation  systems  of  this  type  might  be  able  to  achieve. 

Radiation  alteration  appears  to  be  a  hopeful  weather  modification  approach 
still  lacking  a  developed  technology.  A  cirrus  cover  has  long  been  welcomed  as 
natural  frost  protection  when  it  restricts  the  nocturnal  loss  of  long-wave  radia- 
tion. More  recently,  the  effect  of  cirrus  in  cutting  off  short-wave  daytime  radia- 
tion has  been  modelled  and  measured.  *  *  *  Artificial  simulation  of  cirrus  effects 
by  minute  plastic  bubbles  impregnated  with  substances  to  absorb  selected  wave- 
lengths received  preliminary  attention  .  .  .  but,  to  my  knowledge  has  not  been 
pursued. 

Alteration  of  the  sea-air  interface  is  also  a  potentially  promising  weather 
modification  technique,  particularly  to  suppress  convection  or  to  mitigate  the  de- 
struction by  tropical  hurricanes.  However,  the  technology  in  this  area  may  be 
farther  from  actual  field  trials  than  that  in  radiation.  If  methods  could  be  de- 
veloped to  restrict  sea-air  latent  and  sensible  heat  flux,  the  development  from 
tropical  storm  to  hurricane  might  be  inhibited,  while  not  losing  rainfall  or  other 
benefits  of  the  system.  Presently  the  monomolecular  films  which  cut  down  the 
evaporation  from  reservoirs  do  not  stay  intact  in  oceanic  storm  conditions,  even 
if  the  logistics  of  their  delivery  over  wide  areas  ahead  of  the  storm  were  solved. 
Logistic  obstacles  have  also  impeded  implementation  of  the  promising  idea  of 
cooling  the  waters  ahead  of  the  hurricane  by  mixing  up  the  ocean  layer  above  the 
thermocline.8 

One  possible  means  of  achieving  the  mixing  of  ocean  layers  to  cool 
the  sea  surface,  suggested  above  by  Simpson,  might  be  accomplished, 

7  Simpson.  Joanne,  "What  Weather  Modification  Needs."  1977,  unpublished,  pp.  13--1.". 
(Most  of  the  needs  of  weather  modification  identified  In  this  unpublished  paper,  but  not 
including  her  summary  of  nonseeding  approaches,  were  published  in  another  paper  with 
the  same  title  by  Dr.  Simpson  :  preprints  of  "Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent 
Weather  Modification."  Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  10-13.  1977.  Boston,  American  Meteorological 
Society.  1977,  pp.  304-307. 

8  Ibid. 


131 


at  least  in  part,  as  a  beneficial  byproduct  of  another  power  source 
under  development — the  ocean  thermal  energy  conversion  (OTEC) 
concept.  The  OTEC  plants,  located  in  tropical  waters  where  hurri- 
canes are  spawned  and  grow,  can  provide  surface  cooling  and  so  assist, 
at  least  in  localized  areas,  in  the  abatement  of  tropical  storms  and  their 
attendant  damages.  This  is  another  area  of  overlap  between  energy 
and  weather  interests  where  cooperative  research  and  development 
ought  to  be  explored. 

Research  Needs  for  the  Development  of  Weather  Modification 

In  previous  sections  of  this  chapter  the  rationale  and  the  status  of 
development  of  the  various  techniques  used  to  modify  several  kinds  of 
weather  phenomena  were  summarized  and  discussed  in  some  detail. 
Applications  of  these  techniques  in  both  operational  and  research  proj- 
ects were  considered  and  some  measures  of  the  current  effectiveness 
were  presented.  Among  these  discussions  were  a  variety  of  statements, 
some  explicit  and  some  implied,  on  further  research  necessary  to  ad- 
vance weather  modification  technology.  This  section  addresses  re- 
search needs  more  generally  and  in  a  more  sysf'matic  manner. 
Included  are  specific  requirements  and  recommendations  identified  by 
individual  experts  and  organizations.  Recommendations  of  a  policy 
nature  on  weather  modification  research,  such  as  the  role  of  the  Federal 
Government  and  the  organizational  structure  for  managing  research, 
are  discussed  in  chapter  6,  which  summarizes  the  recommendations  of 
major  policy  studies.  Current  research  programs  of  Federal  agencies 
are  discussed  in  some  detail  in  chapter  5. 

Research  recommendations  summarized  in  this  section  are  primarily 
concerned  with  advancing  the  technology  of  advertent  weather  modi- 
fication intended  for  beneficial  purposes.  Research  needs  in  support 
of  other  aspects  of  planned  weather  modification  and  on  inadvertent 
modification  are  included  in  other  chapters  on  those  subjects.  In  some 
cases,  however,  in  the  following  sets  of  recommendations,  research 
efforts  in  these  other  areas  are  included  with  those  dealing  with  tech- 
nology improvement  in  order  to  preserve  the  completeness  of  the  par- 
ticular set  of  recommendations. 

general  considerations 

Peter  Hobbs  identifies  four  main  phases  through  which  most  devel- 
oping technologies  such  as  weather  modification  must  pass — the  estab- 
lishment of  scientific  feasibility,  engineering  development,  demonstra- 
tion projects,  and  full-scale  plant  operation.9  He  illustrates  these 
phases  in  terms  of  relative  expenditures  and  elapsed  time  for  each  in 
figure  15  and  discusses  the  probable  stage  of  development  for  weather 
modification.  Noting  that  some  would  optimistically  place  develop- 
ment of  the  technology  as  far  along  as  the  dashed  line  YY,  he  himself 
would  more  cautiously  place  the  progress  of  weather  modification  in 
the  vicinity  of  XX,  so  that  the  major  task  ahead  remains  as  the  testing 
of  the  scientific  feasibility  to  produce  significant  artificial  modification 
to  the  weather.10 

9  Hobbs,  Peter  V.,  "Weather  Modification  ;  a  Brief  Review  of  the  Current  Status  and  Sug- 
gestion for  Future  Research."  Background  paper  prepared  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Com- 
merce Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  March  1977,  p.  10. 

10  Ibid. 


132 


This  scientific  feasibility  can  best  be  shown,  according  to  Hobbs, 
through  "mounting  comprehensive  research  programs  to  investigate 
the  structure  and  natural  processes  which  dominate  a  few  relatively 
simple  cloud  and  precipitation  systems  and  to  establish  the  extent  and 
reliability  with  which  they  can  be  artificially  modified."  He  cites  as  a 
principal  reason  for  the  lack  of  significant  progress  in  recent  years  his 
contention  that  "most  of  the  effort  has  been  directed  at  attempts  to 
modify  very  complicated  storm  systems  about  which  little  is  known 
and  good  hypotheses  for  artificial  modification  are  lacking."  11 


Cumulative 


Figure  15. — Schematic  of  the  relative  costs  and  time  associated  with  the  four 
phases  of  development  of  a  new  technology.  The  vertical  lines  XX  and  YY 
indicate  two  widely  differing  views  on  the  present  stage  of  development  of 
weather  modification  technology.  (From  Hobbs,  1977.) 

We  have  seen  that  there  is  some  reason  to  accept  weather  modifica- 
tion techniques  as  having  some  degree  of  operational  capability  in 
possibly  two  areas — cold  fog  dispersal  and  snowfall  enhancement  from 
orographic  clouds — though  there  is  room  for  continued  research  and 
technique  development  in  these  as  well  as  other  areas  of  weather  modi- 
fication. Although  supercooled  fogs  accoimt  for  only  5  percent  of  all 
fog  occurrences,  their  prevalence  at  airports  in  northeastern  and 
northwestern  North  America  makes  cold  fog  dispersal  a  valuable  tool. 
Seeding  of  wintertime  orographic  clouds  in  experiments  and  opera- 
tional projects  in  the  western  United  States  has  probably  resulted  in 
snowfall  increases  of  10  to  30  percent  under  cert  am  conditions. 

Table  13  is  a  review  and  general  outlook  on  weather  modification, 
prepared  by  Ohangnon,  showing  the  stage  of  development,  possible 
economic  value  or  years  before  operational  usefulness,  and  status  of 
research  for  5  areas  of  weather  modification,  for  the  cold-tempera- 
ture  and  warm -temperature  cases  where  applicable.  The.  table  also 
shows  Changnon's  rough  estimate  of  the  complexity  and  difficulty  in 


11  Ibid.,  pp.  10-12. 


133 


relation  to  fog  dispersal  of  the  development  of  modification  techniques 
for  the  other  phenomena.12 

Changnon  emphasizes  the  fact  that  established  techniques  do  not 
exist  for  significant  modification  of  weather  phenomena  such  as  rain- 
fall and  severe  weather  over  the  more  populous  and  major  agricul- 
tural areas  of  the  eastern  United  States.  He  says  that : 

If  measurable  economic  gains  are  to  be  realized  in  the  eastern  two-thirds  of 
the  United  States  due  to  weather  modification  (largely  rain  "management",  hail 
suppression,  and  abatement  of  severe  winter  storms),  much  more  research  and 
effort  must  be  extended.  This  research  will  concern  (1)  the  thorough  study  on 
a  regional  scale  of  the  complex  multicellular  convective  systems  which  are  the 
major  warm  season  rain  and  hail  producers,  and  (2)  the  study  of  the  cold  season 
cyclonic  systems.13 


TABLE  13.-0UTL00K  FOR  PLANNED  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  IN  UNITED  STATES 
[From  Changnon,  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification;  Regional  Issues,"  "75] 


Fog 


Orographic 
precipitation 


Convective 
rainfall 


Severe  convective  Cyclonic  scale 
storms  storms 


Cold  temperatures  Operational  phase; 
«32°F).  low  cost; 

research 
declining. 


Operational  phase    Research  phase; 
(+10  to  +30        favorable  on 


percent);  low 
cost;  research 
declining. 


small  clouds; 
questionable  on 
large  clouds 
and  systems; 
substantial 
research. 


Research  phase; 
5  to  10  yrs 
before  opera- 
tional; sub- 
stantial and 
increasing 
research. 


Warm  tempera-     Research  phase; 
tures  (>32°  F).     2  to  5  yrs:  sub- 
stantial and 
increasing 
research. 


Possible  phase;      Exploratory  phase; 
little  research.1  modest 
research.1 


Degree  of  1.0. 
complexity  (in 
relation  to  fog). 


10. 


100  


1,000. 


Exploratory  phase; 
more  than  10 
yrs;  research  on 
tropical  is 
modest;  research 
on  "other" 
storms  is  minor. 


10,000. 


Questionable  economic  value  unless  chain  reaction  is  found. 


Hobbs  discusses  in  detail  some  of  the  kinds  of  weather  modification 
research  projects  which  he  feels  would  be  fruitful : 

Some  candidate  projects  for  intensive  investigation  include  the  dispersal 
of  cold  and  warm  fogs,  the  enhancement  of  precipitation  from  isolated  conti- 
nental-type cumulus  clouds,  and  the  targeting  of  winter  orographic  snowfalls. 
Our  knowledge  of  each  of  these  subjects  has  reached  the  stage  where  the  mounting 
of  comprehensive  projects  is  likely  to  yield  definitive  results.  Physical  studies 
have  demonstrated  that  cold  fogs  can  be  dissipated  by  seeding  with  dry  ice,  and 
this  technique  is  now  in  use  operationally  at  a  number  of  airports ;  however,  a 
statistical  study  to  quantify  the  reliability  of  this  technique  has  not  (to  my 
knowledge)  been  carried  out.  It  could  provide  the  much  needed  "success  story" 
for  weather  modification.  The  dispersal  of  warm  fogs  is  a  much  more  difficult 
problem  which  has  not  yielded  to  subtle  approaches.  The  U.S.  Air  Force  has 
concluded  that  the  best  approach  to  this  problem  is  through  direct  heat  input ;  this 
approach  appears  sufficiently  promising  that  it  should  be  subjected  to  proper 
physical  and  statistical  evaluation.  The  possibility  of  targeting  winter  orographic 
snowfall  to  specific  areas  on  the  ground  (e.g.,  reservoirs)  has  been  investigated. 
.  .  .  The  technique  shows  sufficient  promise  that  further  studies  involving  both 
physical  and  statistical  evaluation  should  be  carried  out.  Attempts  at  modifying 
the  precipitation  from  cumulus  clouds  dates  back  to  the  beginning  of  modern 
weather  modification  (the  1940's)  ;  however,  very  few  of  these  projects  have 
involved  both  physical  and  statistical  evaluation  (and  many  have  used  neither). 

12  Changrnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr.,  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification;  Regional 
Issues,"  1975.  pp.  172-174. 

13  Ibid.,  p.  172. 


134 


In  view  of  our  growing  understanding  of  the  structure  and  life  cycles  of  individual 
cumulus  clouds,  and  the  auvances  which  have  been  made  in  the  numerical 
simulation  of  these  processes,  the  time  is  now  ripe  to  mount  a  substantial  investi- 
gation to  determine  whether  precipitation  from  these  clouds  can  be  increased. 

The  primary  components  of  the  comprehensive  research  projects  recommended 
above  should  be  physical,  statistical,  and  theoretical  analysis.  Physical  evalua- 
tions should  include  comprehensive  field  studies  using  a  wide  range  of  airborne, 
ground,  and  remote  probing  techniques  to  evaluate  the  natural  systems  and  the 
degrees  to  which  they  can  oe  artificially  modified.  Physical  testing  and  evaluation 
of  a  proposed  weather  modification  technique  is  best  commenced  prior  to  the 
establishment  of  a  statistical  design,  for  not  only  can  physical  evaluations  check 
the  feasibility  of  a  proposed  technique,  but  they  can  indicate  the  conditions  under 
which  it  is  most  likely  to  be  effective  and  thereby  aid  in  sharpening  or  the 
statistical  design.  A  sound  weather  modification  technique  should  also  be  based 
on,  or  supported  by,  the  best  theoretical  models  available  for  describing  the 
weather  system  under  investigation.  If  the  theoretical  and  physical  studies 
indicate  that  a  particular  weather  modification  technique  is  effective,  a  carefully 
designed  randomized  statistical  experiment  should  follow.  Theoretical  and 
physical  evaluations  should  continue  through  the  statistical  experiment.  An 
independent  repetition  of  the  experiment  in  at  least  one  other  geo  raphieal 
area  will  generally  be  required.  The  confluence  of  results  from  theoretical,  phys- 
ical, and  statistical  analyses  carried  out  in  two  areas  would  permit  sound 
quantitative  evaluation  of  the  effectiveness  of  an  artificial  modification 
technique." 

RECOMMENDATIONS  FROM  THE  19  7  3  NATIONAL  ACADEMY  OF  SCIENCES  STUDY 

In  the  1973  study  published  by  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences  15 
three  broad  research  goals  for  weather  modification  were  recommended 
along  with  specific  research  programs  and  projects  required  to  achieve 
those  goals.  The  three  goals  are : 

1.  Identification  by  the  year  1980  of  the  conditions  under  which 
precipitation  can  be  increased,  decreased,  and  redistributed  in 
various  climatological  areas  through  the  addition  of  artificial  ice 
and  condensation  nuclei ; 

2.  Development  in  the  next  decade  of  technology  directed 
toward  mitigating  the  effects  of  the  following  weather  hazards : 
hurricanes,  hailstorms,  fogs,  and  lightning ;  and 

3.  Establishment  of  a  coordinated  national  and  international 
system  for  investigating  the  inadvertent  effects  of  manmade  pol- 
lutants, with  a  target  date  of  1980  for  the  determination  of  the 
extent,  trend,  and  magnitude  of  the  effect  of  various  crucial  pol- 
lutants on  local  weather  conditions  and  on  the  climate  of  the 
world.16 

Achievement  of  these  national  goals  would  require,  according  to 
the  National  Academy  study,  implementation  of  the  following  research 
efforts,  some  in  support  of  all  three  goals  and  others  as  a  means  to 
achieving  each  of  the  three  goals : 
A.  Recommended  research  in  support  of  all  three  goals : 

1.  More  adequate  laboratory  and  experimental  field  programs 
are  needed  to  study  the  microphysical  processes  associated  with 
the  development  of  clouds,  precipitation,  and  thunderstorm 
electrification. 

14  Hohhs.  "Weather  Modification  ;"  a  Brief  Review  of  the  Current  Status  and  Suggestions 
for  Future  Research,"  1977,  pp.  12-13. 

15  Nnt'onal  Academy  of  Sciences,  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification  ;  Problems  and  Prog- 
ress," 1973. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  27. 


135 


2.  There  is  a  need  to  develop  numerical  models  to  describe  the 
behavior  of  layer  clouds,  synoptic  storms,  orographic  clouds,  and 
severe  local  clouds. 

3.  There  is  a  need  for  the  standardization  of  instrumentation  in 
seeding  devices  and  the  testing  of  new  seeding  agents. 

4.  There  should  be  established  a  number  of  weather  modifica- 
tion statistical  research  groups  associated  with  the  major  field 
groups  concerned  with  weather  modification  and  the  inadvertent 
effects  of  pollutants. 

5.  There  should  be  created  a  repository  for  data  on  weather 
modification  activities,  and,  at  a  reasonable  price,  such  data  should 
be  made  available  for  reanaiyses  of  these  activities. 

B.  Recommended  research  in  support  of  goal  1  above : 

1.  There  is  a  continuing  need  for  a  comprehensive  series  of 
randomized  experiments  to  determine  the  effects  of  both  artificial 
and  natural  ice  and  cloud  nuclei  on  precipitation  in  the  principal 
meteorological  regimes  in  the  United  States. 

2.  Investigations  into  the  feasibility  of  redistributing  winter 
precipitation  should  be  continued  and  expanded. 

3.  Experiments  need  to  be  designed  so  that  the  effects  of  seeding 
on  precipitation  outside  the  primary  area  of  interest  can  be 
evaluated. 

4.  Studies  of  the  effects  of  artificial  seeding  on  cumulus  clouds 
and  the  numerical  modeling  of  the  seeding  process  should  be  con- 
tinued and  expanded. 

C.  Recommended  research  in  support  of  goal  2  above : 

1.  Investigations  should  be  made  to  determine  whether  the  seed- 
ing techniques  presently  used  in  the  study  of  isolated  cumlus 
clouds  and  in  hurricane  modification  can  be  extended  to,  or  new 
techniques  developed  for,  the  amelioration  of  severe  thunder- 
storms, hailstorms,  and  even  tornadoes. 

2.  An  expanded  program  is  needed  to  provide  continuous  birth- 
to-death  observations  of  hurricanes  from  above,  around,  within, 
and  beneath  seeded  and  nonseeded  hurricanes  and  for  testing  of 
existing  and  new  techniques  for  reducing  hurricane  intensities. 

3.  Studies  on  the  development  of  hurricane-modification  tech- 
niques should  include  a  randomization  scheme  in  the  design  and 
conduct  of  experimental  programs. 

4.  A  major  national  effort  in  fundamental  research  on  hailstorms 
and  hailstorm  modification  should  be  pursued  aggressively. 

5.  A  comprehensive  program  dealing  with  research  on  warm 
fog  and  its  dissipation  should  be  undertaken. 

6.  A  high  priority  should  be  given  to  the  development  of  a  vari- 
ety of  research  techniques  specifically  designed  for  observing 
severe  storms. 

D.  Recommended  research  in  support  of  goal  3  above : 

1.  National  and  international  programs  should  be  developed 
for  monitoring  the  gaseous  and  particulate  content  of  the  atmos- 
phere, with  particular  emphasis  on  modification  by  man's 
activities. 

2.  Satellite  programs  should  be  developed  to  monitor  continu- 
ally, on  a  global  basis,  the  cloud  cover,  albedo,  and  the  heat  bal- 
ance of  the  atmosphere. 


136 


3.  There  should  be  enlarged  programs  to  measure  those  para- 
meters that  describe  the  climate  of  cities  and  adjoining  country- 
sides and  to  determine  the  physical  mechanisms  responsible  for 
these  differences. 

4.  Continued  strong  support  should  be  provided  to  the  major 
effort  now  underway,  known  as  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research 
Program,  to  develop  properly  parameterized  mathematical  models 
of  the  global  atmosphere-ocean  system,  to  obtain  the  observational 
data  to  test  their  efficacy,  and  to  provide  the  computers  that  permit 
simulation  of  the  effects  of  human  activities  on  a  worldwide  scale.17 

Some  of  the  recommended  research  activities  discussed  above  were 
already  underway  at  the  time  of  the  1973  National  Academy  study, 
but  continuation  or  expansion  of  these  efforts  were  advised.  Since  that 
time  others  have  been  initiated,  and  beneficial  results  from  continua- 
tion and  expansion  of  earlier  efforts  have  been  achieved.  The  overall 
decrease  in  funding  of  the  Federal  research  program  in  the  past  few 
years  has  resulted  in  curtailments  of  valuable  research  projects  identi- 
fied to  meet  the  goals  above,  however,  and  the  current  level  of  research 
activities  can  hardly  lead  to  achievement  of  the  goals  set  by  the  Acad- 
emy study.  The  recent  history  of  Federal  funding  for  weather  modi- 
fication is  discussed  and  summarized  in  chapter  5,  as  part  of  the  treat- 
ment on  Federal  activities.18 

RECOMMENDATIONS  OF  THE  ADVANCED  PLANNING  GROUP  OF  NOAA 

Concerned  that  its  research  programs  be  more  responsible  to  societal 
needs,  the  Weather  Modification  Project  Office  of  the  National  Oceanic 
and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA)  established  a  small  ad- 
vanced planning  group  in  1976.  Consisting  of  one  full-time  and  three 
part-time  members,  none  of  whom  were  permanent  NOAA  employees, 
the  advanced  planning  group  was  charged  with  making  recommenda- 
tions and  preliminary  plans  for  research  projects  to  be  carried  out 
over  the  following  10  to  15  years.  The  group  set  about  its  task  by 
visiting  various  user  groups  to  learn  opinions  about  past  Federal 
research  and  by  reviewing  available  literature  and  consulting  scien- 
tists on  past  and  current  weather  modification  field  programs.19 

The  advanced  planning  group  acknowledged  that  considerable  prog- 
ress had  been  made  in  weather  modification  in  the  past  few  years, 
but  noted  that  the  current  research  approach  has  the  following  short- 
comings : 

1.  Research  in  the  United  States  on  stimulation  of  precipitation 
has  been  concentrated  in  the  semiarid  western  States  and  in  Flor- 
ida rather  than  in  the  Corn  Belt,  where  the  potential  economic 
payoff  is  much  greater. 

2.  Research  on  stimulation  of  rainfall  and  on  suppression  of 
hail  and  lightning  have  been  carried  out  in  separate  projects.  A 
single  project  dedicated  to  the  concept  of  precipitation  manage- 
ment in  large  convective  clouds  would  be  more  likely  to  solve  the 
problem  of  changing  hailfall  and  rainfall  simultaneously  to  pro- 
duce net  economic  benefits. 

»  Ibid.,  pp.  27-30. 

18  Sop  n  242. 

w  Dennis  Arnott  S.  and  A.  Gaprln.  "Rocommendat'ons  for  Future  Research  in  Weather 
Modification,"  Weather  Modification  Program  Office.  Environmental  Research  T.aboartories, 
Nntionm  Ocennic  nnr]  Atmospheric  Administration,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Bouldei* 
Colo.,  November  1977,  112  pp. 


137 


3.  Weather  modification  has  usually  been  equated  with  cloud 
seeding.  Other  possible  means  of  modifying  the  weather  have 
been  largely  ignored. 

4.  Weather  modification  is  usually  considered  in  isolation, 
rather  than  as  an  integral  part  of  a  total  response  to  weather- 
related  problems.  There  are  exceptions :  dry  ice  seeding  to  improve 
visibility  during  cold- fog  episodes  at  airports  is  normally  viewed 
as  a  supplement  to,  rather  than  a  replacement  for,  good  instru- 
ment landing  systems.  However,  cloud  seeding  to  increase  pre- 
cipitation is  sometimes  viewed  as  an  alternative  to  irrigation  or 
water  conservation  measures,  a  situation  we  think  is  regrettable. 
Fortunately,  research  in  inadvertent  weather  modification  is  tend- 
ing to  break  down  the  artificial  isolation  of  research  related  to 
weather  modification  from  other  aspects  of  atmospheric  science.20 

Having  examined  the  current  weather  modification  research  situa- 
tion as  perceived  by  user  groups  and  research  scientists,  the  NOAA 
Advanced  Planning  Group  proceeded  to  formulate  recommendations 
for  future  research,  using  certain  general  technical,  economic  and  soci- 
ological guidelines.  Proposed  research  was  evaluated  on  the  basis  of 
answers  to  the  following  questions : 

1.  Will  the  project  advance  scientific  understanding  of  atmos- 
pheric processes  and  thereby  contribute  to  an  improved  capability 
to  modify  weather  on  a  predictable  basis  ? 

2.  Will  the  operational  capability  toward  which  the  project  is 
directed  provide  net  economic  benefit? 

3.  Are  the  proposed  research  and  the  possible  subsequent  appli- 
cations socially  acceptable  % 21 

The  group  completed  its  study  during  1977  and  provided  its  recom- 
mended research  program  to  NOAA's  Weather  Modification  Project 
Office.  The  5  specific  recommendations  are  summarized  below : 

1.  Work  should  be  continued  to  determine  the  potential  for  in- 
creasing rainfall  from  convective  clouds  in  warm,  humid  air 
masses  by  seeding  for  dynamic  effects.  Design  of  a  new,  compre- 
hensive project  to  be  conducted  in  the  eastern  half  of  the  United 
States  should  begin  immediately.  This  project  should  gather  in- 
formation on  the  effects  of  seeding  upon  rainfall,  hail,  lightning, 
and  thunderstorm  winds  both  within  and  outside  a  fixed  target 
area.  Additional  field  studies  in  Florida  to  establish  the  physical 
mechanisms  responsible  for  the  apparent  increases  in  total  target 
rainfall  during  FACE  22  in  1975-76  should  be  performed  during 
at  least  two  seasons  in  parallel  with  the  design  of  the  new  project. 
The  results  of  the  additional  studies  would  be  valuable  input  for 
the  design  of  the  new  comprehensive  experiment. 

2.  Because  of  the  promising  beginnings  of  the  Sierra  Coopera- 
tive Project  on  orographic  precipitation  and  the  HIPLEX  23  work 
on  cumulus  clouds  in  the  semiarid  western  States,  and  because  the 
projects  are  likely  to  produce  important  results  of  wide  applica- 

20  Ibid.,  p.  8. 
a  Ibid.,  pp.  8-9. 

22 The  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment  (FACE),  an  experimental  project  sponsored  by 
NOAA's  discussed  under  activities  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  in  ch.  5.  p.  292. 

23  The  Sierra  Cooperative  Project  and  the  High  Plains  Cooperative  Program  (HIPLEX) 
are  projects  sponsored  under  the  Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management  of 
the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  in  the  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  These  projects  are  dis- 
cussed in  ch.  5,  pp.  258  and  263,  respectively. 


138 


tion,  we  see  no  reason  for  new  initiatives  in  these  areas  until  those 
projects  are  completed. 

3.  In  view  of  the  need  for  more  detailed  knowledge  of  hurricane 
behavior,  we  recommend  that  research  on  hurricane  modification 
be  continued  with  the  understanding  that  the  research  is  a  long- 
term  effort  with  potenial  payoff  10  to  20  years  away.  We  recom- 
mend further  that  modeling  and  other  theoretical  work  be  intensi- 
fied to  provide  a  better  basis  for  interpretation  of  data  from 
seeding  trials. 

4.  Concepts  for  hail  suppression  and  lightning  suppression 
should  be  subjected  to  fundamental  reappraisal  before  the  resump- 
tion of  any  field  experiments. 

5.  Long-range  planning  should  be  continued  toward  "futuristic" 
projects  in  which  problems  in  deliberate,  large-scale  weather  mod- 
ification, inadvertent  weather  modification,  forecasting,  and  agri- 
cultural climatology  would  be  treated  together  rather  than 
separately.24 

SUMMARY  OF  FEDERAL  RESEARCH  NEEDS  EXPRESSED  BY  STATE  OFFICIALS 

At  the  request  of  NOAA's  Advanced  Planning  Group,  whose  study 
was  discussed  in  the  previous  section,  the  North  American  Interstate 
Weather  Modification  Council  (NAIWMC)  25  compiled  information 
on  recommended  Federal  weather  modification  research,  based  on  the 
needs  of  users  within  NAIWMC  member  States.  Opinions  of  State  offi- 
cials on  needed  research  were  obtained  from  16  States  through  meet- 
ings sponsored  by  California,  North  Dakota,  Pennsylvania,  South  Da- 
kota. Texas,  and  Utah  and  through  questionnaires  sent  out  by  the 
NAIWMC  during  1976  and  1977. 

Table  14  summarizes  results  of  the  NAIWMC  investigation,  showing 
perceived  needs  for  research  for  weather  modification  users,  as  inter- 
preted by  the  State  officials.26  Keyes  notes  that  the  major  research  area 
recommended  by  most  State  and  local  governments  is  in  the  evalua- 
tion of  ongoing,  long-term  operational  projects  within  those  States. 
Other  important  research  needs  expressed  were  for  further  develop- 
ment of  seeding  technology  and  for  economic,  environmental,  and 
societal  studies  necessary  for  eventual  public  acceptance  of  weather 
modification.27 


15  The  purposes,  organization,  and  activities  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather 
Modification  Council  are  discussed  in  some  detail  in  ch.  7.  p.  333. 

26  Reves.  Conrad  G..  Jr..  "Federal  Research  Needs  and  New  Law  Requirements  in  Weather 
Modification  :  the  NAIWMC  Viewpoint,"  testimony  before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce 
We.ither  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  14.  1977. 

»  Ibid. 


139 


TABLE  14. — SUMMARY  OF  FEDERAL  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  RESEARCH  NEEDS,  DETERMINED  FROM 
OPINIONS  OF  STATE  OFFICIALS  DURING  STATE  MEETINGS  AND  THROUGH  QUESTIONNAIRES  FROM  THE 
NORTH  AMERICAN  INTERSTATE  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  COUNCIL 

[From  Keyes,  1977;  table  format  from  Dennis  and  Gagin,  1977] 


Major  categories  of  research  i 


State 


Arizona   a,  b,  c  a,  b,  e...  a,  b,  c  

California   a,  b,  c  a,  b  a,  b,  c  

Illinois   a,  b,  c  a,  b,  c,  d.  a,  b,  c  Yes  

Indiana   b,  c  a,  b,  c,  e.  b,  c  Yes  

Kansas   a,  b,  c  b,  c  a,  c  

Maryland   a,  b,  c       b,  c  Yes  Yes. 

Michigan   a,  b,  c  b,  c  a  Yes  

Missouri   a,  b  a,  c  

North  Carolina  2  

North  Dakota   a  b,  c,  e  c  a. 

Pennsylvania   c  c  Yes  Yes  

South  Dakota   a,  b,  c  b,  c  c  

Texas   a,  c  a,  b,  d...  c  a,  c. 

Utah   a,  b  b,  d  a  

Vermont   a  a  a  a,  c. 

Virginia s  


•  Categories  of  Federal  research: 

1.  Evaluation: 

a.  Of  operational  programs. 

b.  Physical  studies. 

c.  Extra-area  effects. 

2.  Seeding  technology: 

a.  New  seeding  agents. 

b.  Transport  and  diffusion,  delivery  methods. 

c.  Hail  suppression  methods. 

d.  New  tools,  for  example,  satellites. 

e.  Public  education. 

3.  Economic,  ecological,  and  societal  studies: 

a.  Economic  benefits. 

b.  Toxicity  of  agents. 

c.  Societal  studies. 

4.  Detection  of  clandestine  seeding. 

5.  Inadvertent  weather  modification. 

6.  Forecasting: 

a.  Short  range. 

b.  Local  topographic  effects. 

c.  Long  range. 

3  Need  a  national  policy  first. 
3  Mainly  hurricane  modification. 

RESEARCH  RECOMMENDATIONS  OF  THE  AMS  COMMITTEE  ON  WEATHER 

MODIFICATION 

Recently,  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Weather  Modifica- 
tion of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  28  summarized  his  com- 
mittee's recommendations  on  recommended  weather  modification  re- 
search needs.29  It  was  noted  that  the  primary  focus  of  such  research 
should  be  in  the  areas  of  purposeful  alteration  of  patterns  of  cloud 
systems  and  precipitation  and  in  the  inadvertent  impact  of  man's 
activities.  In  view  of  critical  water  problems  affecting  large  portions 
of  the  country  and  the  potential  for  increased  demand  for  application 
of  weather  modification  techniques  by  water  users,  the  necessity  for 
improved  understanding  of  underlying  physical  processes  through 
pursuit  of  basic  research  was  emphasized.  In  particular,  the  "real 
payoff"  to  improvements  in  purposeful  weather  modification  should 
be  seen  as  coming  from  increased  ability  to  understand,  predict,  and 

28  Weather  modification  activities  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  and  purposes 
and  concerns  of  its  Committee  on  Weather  Modification  are  discussed  in  ch.  8,  p.  395. 

29  Silverman.  Bernard  A.,  testimonv  before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board,  Champaign,  111..  Oct.  14.  1977. 


140 


control  the  formation  and  development  of  mesoscale 30  cloud  systems.31 

Subject  areas  for  recommended  research  to  accomplish  basic  under- 
standing of  atmospheric  processes  necessary  for  the  development  of 
weather  modification  technology  were  presented  by  the  AMS  com- 
mittee in  the  following  outline  form : 32 

M esoscale  Cloud  Dynamics 

A.  Effect  of  seeding  on  convective  cloud  development  and 
evolution  : 

1.  Growth  of  convective  clouds. 

2.  Merger  of  clouds  into  groups  and  systems. 

3.  Organization  of  inflow  (coupling  of  midtroposphere  with 
the  boundary  layer). 

4.  Enhanced  moisture  budget  efficiency. 

B.  Interaction  of  clouds  with  each  other  and  with  their  environ- 
ment : 

1.  Response  to  mesoscale  forcing  function. 

2.  Relationship  between  low-level  convergence  and  cloud  field 
evolution. 

3.  Role  of  outdrafts  in  development  and  sustenance  of  cloud 
systems. 

4.  Role  of  anvils  in  the  evolution  of  the  cloud  field. 

C.  Precipitation  "nowcasting" : 

1.  Low-level  convergence  field  as  predictor  of  precipitation 
intensity. 

2.  Kinematic  and  thermodynamic  predictors  and  covariates  for 
statistical  evaluation. 

D.  Need  for  a  multidisciplined  mesoscale  experiment  with  strong 
physical  emphasis. 

Precip  itation  Microp  hysics 

A.  Evolution  of  natural  ice  in  cloud : 

1.  Nucleation  processes. 

2.  Secondary  ice  production  processes  : 

(a)  Laboratory  studies  of  causality. 

(b)  Field  investigations  to  define'  appropriate  in-cloud 
criteria  for  multiplication  of  ice. 

B.  Interaction  between  microphysics  and  dynamics  to  produce  and 
sustain  precipitation. 

C.  Effect  of  seeding  on  (A)  and  (B)  above. 

D.  Distinction  between  microstructure  of  clouds  developing  over 
land  and  over  water  in  terms  of  suitability  for  seeding. 

E.  Clarification  of  microstructure  of  clouds  developing  within  the 
hurricane  environment  in  terms  of  suitability  for  seeding. 

F.  Cloud  microstructure  climatology  for  selected  regions  of  the 
United  States. 

G.  Effect  of  ice  generation  on  charge  separation  and  electrification 

30  Mpsosealo  meteorological  phenomena  are  those  with  horizontal  dimensions  ranging  from 
a  few  tens  of  kilometers  to  a  few  hundred  kilometers. 

a  Silverman,  testimony  before  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977. 
»  Ibid. 


141 

Area  of  Seeding  Effect 

A.  Induced  by  dynamic  response  of  environment. 

B.  Induced  by  diffusion  of  nucleating  material : 

1.  In  orographic  regions. 

2.  Transport  through  convective  processes. 

C.  Insolation  pattern  resulting  from  mid-  and  upper-level  outflow. 

Turbulence  and  Diffusion 

A.  Targeting  of  surface-based  source (s)  of  nuclei  into  desired  cloud 
region. 

B.  Entrainment  processes  related  to  cloud  development. 

C.  Spread  of  nuclei  released  in  cloud  (spatial  and  temporal 
distribution). 

Seeding  Agents  and  Methods 

A.  Nucleation  efficiency  studies. 

B.  Particle  sizing  and  composition  analyses. 

C.  Particle  generation  systems. 

D.  Improvement  of  technology. 

Cloud  Climatology  for  Technology  Applicability 

A.  National  in  scope. 

B.  Frequency  of  occurrence  of  clouds  by  type. 

C.  Cloud  base  and  cloud  top  heights  for  selected  regions. 

D.  Properties  of  in-cloud  microstructure. 

E.  Aerosol  characteristics. 

F.  Radar  population  studies. 

G.  Precipitation  statistics. 

H.  Model-derived  "seedability"  assessment. 

Inadvertent  Impacts 

A.  Effect  on  climatic  change. 

B.  Effect  on  air  quality. 

,C.  Effect  on  meteorology  near  large  urban  regions : 

1.  Thermal  pattern. 

2.  Precipitation. 

3.  Cloudiness. 

D.  Effect  on  meteorology  near  deforested  areas. 

Cloud  M  odeling 

A.  Synthesis  of  numerical  simulation  with  atmospheric  observations 
on  all  scales. 

B.  Inclusion  of  cloud  interaction  and  outdraft  convergence. 

C.  Mesoscale  forcing  (e.g.  sea  breeze,  topography,  etc.). 

Improved  Methods  of  Statistical  Design  and  Evaluation 

A.  Required  to  interpret  results  of  new  mesoscale  experiment. 

B.  Required  for  extraction  of  physical  information  from  previously- 
performed  nonrandomized  experiments. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  12 


142 


Study  of  oak  brush  as  elk  forage — part  of  environmental  research  conducted 
part  of  Project  Skywater.  (Courtesy  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.) 


143 


RESEARCH  RECOMMENDATIONS  RELATED  TO  EXTENDED  AREA  AND  TIME 

EFFECTS 

At  the  1977  workshop  on  the  extended  area  and  extended  time  ef- 
fects of  weather  modification,  participants  developed  some  recommen- 
dations for  future  research  into  these  effects.33  The  following  research 
activities,  not  necessarily  in  any  order  of  priority,  were  recommended 
to  be  undertaken  immediately  with  current  available  tools  or  over  a 
period  of  time,  as  appropriate : 

The  use  of  computer  simulation  and  modeling  can  provide 
important  information  on  the  areal  coverage  and  magnitude  of  the 
effects  of  weather  modification.  It  can  also  define  the  types  of  in- 
formation and  the  sensitivity  required  for  future  field 
experiments. 

Models  developed  to  detect  moisture  depletion  in  natural  and 
seeded  cases  as  an  airmass  moves  over  successive  mountain  ridges 
should  be  applied  and  verified  by  field  measurements  in  an  area 
with  a  minimum  of  complexities  caused  by  the  introduction  of  new 
moisture  sources.  In  situ  measurements  of  temperature,  pressure, 
liquid  water  content,  ice  crystal  concentrations,  and  precipitation 
on  the  ground  and  in  the  air  will  be  needed  as  inputs  to  the  model 
and  for  model  validation. 

An  intensive  study  should  be  initiated  on  particulate  transport, 
including  the  transport  of  both  seeding  material  and  ice  crystals 
produced  by  seeding.  Techniques  are  currently  available  to 
measure  ice  crystal  concentrations,  nuclei,  and  silver  in  precipi- 
tation. Special  tracers  are  becoming  available  and  should  be  de- 
veloped further.  Eemote  sensing  techniques  for  measuring  ice  and 
water  need  further  development. 

A  re-analysis  of  some  past  field  programs  could  be  undertaken 
immediately.  (The  question  of  apparent  decreases  in  seeding  ef- 
fectiveness in  successive  years  of  the  Australian  experiment  has 
not  been  resolved  adequately  as  to  whether  this  effect  is  real  or  an 
analysis  artifact.  The  reported  persistence  of  ice  nuclei  for  days 
after  seeding  at  Climax  and  its  relationship  to  the  apparent 
decrease  in  the  seed/no  seed  ratios  with  time  should  be  further 
investigated.) 

Continuing  monitoring  should  be  initiated  of  such  quantities 
as  ice  nuclei  concentrations  in  project  areas  in  order  to  establish 
new  benchmarks.  A  modeling  effort  should  also  be  undertaken  to 
investigate  the  evaporation  and  reprecipitation  processes. 

Studies  of  wide-area  effects  from  seeding  summer  convective 
storm  systems  may  require  more  preliminary  work  before  mount- 
ing a  major  field  effort  since  less  is  known  about  these  phenomena. 
These  studies  should  be  directed  toward  acquiring  information 
about  the  possible  redistribution  of  convective  instability  and  the 
microphysical  effects  including  the  transport  of  ice  nuclei  and/ or 
ice  crystals,  and  the  possible  interactive  effects  when  these  par- 
ticles are  entrained  into  other  cloud  systems. 

Prior  to  the  design  of  a  major  wide-area  study  program,  initial 
studies  should  include :  cloud  population  studies,  including  time 

33  Brown,  et  al..  "Transactions  of  the  Workshop  on  Extended  Space  and  Time  Effects  of 
Weather  Modification,"  1978,  pp.  14-18. 


144 


and  space  distributions  and  cloud  microphysics ;  hypothesis  de- 
velopment, including  numerical  modeling ;  reexamination  of  pre- 
vious experimental  programs ;  augmentation  of  ongoing  programs 
to  study  total-area  effects;  and  development  of  new  capabilities 
including  satellite  measurements,  rain  gage  network  design,  data 
processing,  and  management  and  seeding  delivery  systems. 

The  final  design  of  a  field  program  will  be  dependent  on  the 
findings  from  these  preliminary  studies.  It  appears  likely  that  it 
will  be  necessary  to  mount  a  major  effort  to  determine  the  total- 
area  effects  and  mechanics  of  convective  storm  seeding.  Prelimi- 
nary estimates  call  for  a  10-year  studv  covering  nn  area  of  at  least 
a  300-mile  radius  in  the  mid-United  States.  Ideally  this  study 
could  be  operated  in  conjunction  with  other  mesoscale  field  studies 
in  cumulus  convection  and  precipitation  forecasting. 

A  national  technology  assessment  on  precipitation  modification 
should  be  conducted  with  the  total-area  effect  included  in  both 
the  physical  science  and  social  science  context.34 

a*  Ibid. 


CHAPTER  4 


INADVERTENT  WEATHER  AND  CLIMATE 
MODIFICATION 

(By  John  R.  Justus,  Analyst  in  Earth  Science,  Science  Policy  Research  Division, 
Congressional  Research  Service) 

Out  of  the  total  ensemble  of  environmental  factors,  the  subset  which 
is  sensed  most  immediately  and  directly  by  man  and  which  has  the 
greatest  integrated  impact  on  human  activities  is  that  which  is  sub- 
sumed under  the  terms  of  iveather  and  climate. — Earl  W.  Barrett, 
1975,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration. 

Introduction 

The  relationship  between  man  and  weather  has  been  basically  the 
one  stated  succinctly  by  Charles  Dudley  Warner:  Everybody  talked 
about  the  weather,  but  nobody  did  anything  about  it.  In  the  1940's, 
however,  the  discovery  that  clouds  could  be  modified  by  additions  of 
freezing  nuclei  created  a  realization  that,  at  some  times  and  places  at 
least,  it  might  be  possible  to  do  something  about  the  weather.  This 
entering  wedge  into  the  field  of  intentional  or  planned  weather  modi- 
fication has  since  been  heavily  studied  and  exploited ;  it  had,  as  a  by- 
product, the  creation  of  considerable  interest  in  weather  modification 
on  the  part  of  both  the  scientific  community  and  the  general  popula- 
tion. The  science  and  technology  of  planned  weather  modification  are' 
discussed  in  chapter  3.  The  possibility  that  man  has,  in  fact,  been  doing 
something  about  the  weather  without  knowing  it  has  become  a  subject 
for  serious  consideration,  and  chapter  4  reviews  a  number  of  processes 
and  mechanisms  governing  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modifi- 
cation. 

TERMINOLOGY 

By  way  of  clarification,  it  is  important  to  appreciate  the  fact  that 
differences  of  scale  are  implied  in  the  terms  "weather  modification" 
and  "climate  modification." 

Climate 

To  most  everyone,  the  term  climate  usually  brings  to  mind  an  aver- 
age regime  of  weather  or  the  average  temperature  and  precipitation 
of  a  locality.  This  is  a  rather  misleading  concept,  for  the  average  may 
be  a  rare  event.  Actually,  weather  from  year  to  year  oscillates  widely 
so  that  climate  is  a  statistical  complex  of  many  values  and  variables, 
including  the  temperature  of  the  air,  water,  ice,  and  land  surfaces; 
winds  and  ocean  currents ;  the  air's  moisture  or  humidity ;  the  cloudi- 
ness and  cloud  water  content,  groundwater,  lake  levels,  and  the  water 
content  of  snow  and  of  land  and  sea  ice;  the  pressure  and  density  of 


(145) 


146 


the  atmosphere  and  ocean;  the  composition  of  (dry)  air;  and  the 
salinity  of  the  ocean.  All  of  these  elements  encompass  climate  and  are 
interconnected  by  the  various  physical  and  dynamic  processes  occur- 
ring in  the  system,  such  as  precipitation  and  evaporation,  radiation, 
and  the  transfer  of  heat  and  momentum  by  advection  (predominantly 
horizontal,  large-scale  motions  of  the  atmosphere),  convection  (large- 
scale  vertical  motions  of  the  atmosphere  characterized  by  rising  and 
sinking  air  movements),  and  turbulence  (a  state  of  atmospheric  flow 
typified  by  irregular,  random  air  movements) . 

Climatic  fluctuation  and  climatic  change 

Rather  than  by  average  value,  these  elements  are  best  characterized 
by  frequency  distributions,  which  can,  in  many  places,  span  a  wide 
range  for  a  given  element.  Within  such  a  range,  one  notes  irregular 
fluctuations  characterized  by  the  occurrence  of  extreme  values  for  given 
elements  of  the  climatic  system.  In  such  instances,  a  climatic  fluctua- 
tion is  said  to  be  experienced,  not  a  climatic  change.  A  change  denotes 
that  a  new  equilibrium  had  been  achieved,  and  with  it,  a  rather  dif- 
ferent frequency  distribution  for  all  climatic  elements.  Thus,  the  term 
change  is  not  to  be  confused  with  fluctuation,  where  trends  are  fre- 
quently reversed,  even  though  some  successive  values  may  cluster  for 
a  while  on  one  side  or  the  other  of  the  "average." 

Weather 

Defined  as  the  state  of  the  atmosphere  at  any  given  time,  the  prev- 
alent belief  of  the  public,  that  wherever  the  weather  goes  the  climate 
follows,  is  fallacious.  On  the  contrary,  wherever  the  climate  goes,  so 
goes  the  weather.  Weather  is  merely  a  statistic  of  the  physical  climatic 
state. 

Weather  modification 

As  used  in  the  context  of  this  chapter  and  in  the  text  at  large, 
weather  modification  refers  collectively  to  any  number  of  activities 
conducted  to  intentionally  or  inadvertently  modify,  through  artificial 
means,  the  elements  of  weather  and,  in  turn,  the  occurrence  and  be- 
havior of  discrete  weather  events.  Intentional  or  planned  weather 
modification  activities  may  be  conducted  for  a  variety  of  different 
purposes,  including:  Increasing  or  decreasing  rain  and  snow  over  a 
particular  area;  reducing  damage  to  crops  and  property  from  hail; 
reducing  the  number  of  forest  fires  that  are  started  by  lightning; 
removing  fog  at  airports;  changing  the  intensity  and  direction  of 
hurricanes  so  they  cause  less  destruction ;  mitigating  the  destructive- 
ness  of  severe  thunderstorms  and  tornadoes. 

Climate  modification 

This  encompasses  the  planned  or  inadvertent  alteration,  through 
artificial  means,  of  the  elemental  properties  comprising  the  air,  sea,  ice, 
land,  and  biospheric  components  of  the  climatic  system  in  order  to 
effect  a  new  equilibrium  among  the  elements  of  climate  and,  conse- 
quently, a  new  climate  regime.  In  most  instances,  the  term  alludes  to 
mesoscale  and  macroscale  climates,  from  those  of  regions  to  the  entire 
globe.  Another  common  usage  is  in  reference  to  the  microscale  climates 
of  cities  where  persistent,  inadvertent  effects  on  weather,  in  turn, 
modify  the  climates  of  greater  metropolitan  areas. 


147 


Planned  climate  modification 

While  the  term  climate  usually  brings  to  mind  an  "average"  regime 
of  weather  or,  more  properly,  a  frequency  distribution  of  the  elements 
and  events  of  weather,  the  climatic  system  itself  consists  of  those 
elements  and  processes  that  are  basically  the  same  as  those  responsible 
for  short-term  weather  and  coordinately  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
long-term  physical  climatic  state.  It  follows,  then,  that  one  of  the  pur- 
poses of  planned  weather  modification  activities  may  be  to  artificially 
change  the  climate  of  a  location  or  region  through  means  including, 
but  not  necessarily  limited  to:  Massive  and  protracted  extension  of 
present  cloud-seeding  operations  to  influence  natural  precipitation  de- 
velopment cycles;  intentional  initiation  of  large  heat  sources  to  influ- 
ence convective  circulation  or  evaporate  fog ;  intentional  modification 
of  solar  radiation  exchange  or  heat  balance  of  the  Earth  or  clouds 
through  the  release  of  gases,  dusts,  liquids,  or  aerosols  in  the  atmos- 
phere; planned  modification  of  the  energy  transfer  characteristics  of 
the  Earth's  land  or  water  surface  by  dusting  with  powders,  liquid 
sprays  or  dyes,  water  impoundment,  deforestation,  etc. 

The  dramatic  idea  of  some  great  technological  leap  toward  purpose- 
fully altering  climate  never  seems  to  lose  its  appeal.  The  problem  with 
these  grand  schemes  is  that,  even  if  feasible,  every  fix — technological 
or  otherwise — has  its  toll  in  side  effects.  But  leaving  aside  for  the 
moment  the  question  of  whether  it  makes  sense  to  alter  or  conserve 
climate,  many  of  the  schemes  that  have  been  suggested  for  modifying 
climate  on  a  hemispheric  or  global  scale  have  so  far  been  considered  to 
be  on  the  fringe  of  science  fiction.  The  range  of  possibilities  widens 
rapidly  if  one  imagines  the  financial  resources  of  the  major  world 
powers  available  to  carry  them  out.  Periodically  resurgent  are  such 
schemes  as  darkening,  heating,  and  melting  of  the  Arctic  icepack,  the 
damming  of  the  Bering  Strait,  the  transportation  of  Antarctic  ice- 
bergs, the  diverting  southward  of  North  American  and  Asian  rivers 
that  empty  into  the  Arctic,  and  the  modification  of  tropical  storms.1 
These  and  other  perennial  suggestions  are  summarized  in  Figure  1. 

iKellogjr.  W.  W.  and  S.  H.  Schneider,  "Climate  Stabilization:  For  Better  or  for  Worse?" 
Science,  vol.  186,  Dec.  27,  1974,  pp.  1163-1172. 


148 


Figube  1. — A  survey  of  grandiose  schemes  that  have  been  proposed  to  modify  or 
control  climate.  (From  Kellogg  and  Schneider,  1974.) 

Inadvertent  climate  modification 

The  modification  processes  may  also  be  initiated  or  triggered  in- 
advertently rather  than  purposefully,  and  the  possibility  exists  that  so- 
ciety may  be  changing  the  climate  through  its  own  actions  by  pushing 
on  certain  leverage  points.  Inadvertently,  we  are  already  causing 
measurable  variations  on  the  local  scale.  Artificial  climatic  effects  have 
been  observed  and  documented  on  local  and  regional  scales,  partic- 
ularly in  and  downwind  of  heavily  populated  industrial  areas  where 
waste  heat,  particulate  pollution  and  altered  ground  surface  char- 
acteristics are  primarily  responsible  for  the  perceived  climate  modifi- 
cation. The  climate  in  and  near  large  cities,  for  example,  is  warmer, 
the  daily  range  of  temperature  is  less,  and  annual  precipitation  is 
greater  than  if  the  cities  had  never  been  built.  The  climate  of  the  world 
is  governed  mainly  by  the  globally  averaged  effects  of  the  Sun,  the 
location  and  movement  of  air  masses,  and  the  circulation  patterns  of 
the  world  ocean.  It  is  by  no  means  clear  that  the  interaction  of  these 
vast  forces  can  be  significantly  influenced  by  human  activities.  Al- 
though not  verifiable  at  present,  the  time  may  not  be  far  off  when 
human  activities  will  result  in  measurable  large-scale  changes  in 
weather  and  climate  of  more  than  passing  significance.  It  is  important 
to  appreciate  the  fact  that  the  role  of  man  at  this  global  level  is  still 
controversial,  and  existing  models  of  the  general  circulation  are  not  yet 
capable  of  testing  the  effects  in  a  conclusive  manner. 

Nevertheless,  a  growing  fraction  of  current  evidence  does  point  to 
the  possibility  of  unprecedented  impact  on  the  global  climate  by 
human  activities,  albeit  the  effects  may  be  occurring  below  the  thres- 
hold where  they  could  be  statistically  detected  relative  to  the  record 


149 


of  natural  fluctuations  and,  therefore,  could  be  almost  imperceptible 
amid  the  ubiquitous  variability  of  climate.  But  while  the  degree  of  in- 
fluence on  world  climate  may  as  yet  be  too  small  to  detect  against  the 
background  of  natural  variations  and  although  mathematical  models 
of  climatic  change  are  still  imperfect,  significant  global  effects  in  the 
future  are  inferred  if  the  rates  of  growtn  of  industry  and  population 
persist. 

Background 
historical  perspective 

The  possibility  of  climatic  alterations  by  human  activity  was  alluded 
to  in  the  scientific  literature  at  the  beginning  of  this  century,  and  again 
in  the  late  1930's,  but  it  received  little  serious  attention  until  the  1950  s. 
The  first  period  of  thermonuclear  testing,  1954  to  1958,  generated  a 
great  deal  of  concern  about  drastic  and  widespread  elfects  on  weather. 
It  was  felt  that  anything  which  liberated  such  great  energies  must 
somehow  influence  the  atmosphere.  The  fact  that  a  device  fired  at  sea 
level  or  under  the  sea  did  create  locally  a  large  convective  cloud  was 
cited  as  evidence. 

By  about  1960  work  had  shown  that  no  large-scale  or  long-term 
meteorological  effects  would  ensue  from  nuclear  testing  at  the  levels 
conducted  in  the  1950?s.  It  had  become  clear  that  the  inertia  of  the 
atmosphere-ocean  system  was  too  large  to  be  perturbed  seriously  by  the 
sudden  release  of  any  energy  man  could  generate.  Instead  of  the  spec- 
tacular and  violent,  it  was  realized  that  one  would  have  to  look  to  the 
slow  and  insidious  to  find  evidence  of  human  influences  on  climate  and 
weather. 

Some  evidence  that  manmade  carbon  dioxide  was  accumulating  in 
the  atmosphere  appeared  as  early  as  1938.  This,  together  with  some 
early  systematic  data  from  Scandinavia,  led  to  the  inclusion  of  a  car- 
bon dioxide  (C02)  measurement  program  during  the  International 
Geophysical  Year  (IGY),  1957-1958.  This  C02  measurement  pro- 
gram, which  continues  today,  was  the  first  serious  scientific  study  of 
a  possible  manmade  climatic  influence  on  a  large  scale. 

As  the  reality  of  the  C02  effect  became  established,  and  as  the  gen- 
eral mood  of  increased  concern  for  the  environment  and  the  concept 
of  "spaceship  Earth"  developed  during  the  1960's,  increased  scientific 
efforts  began  to  be  focused  on  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modi- 
fication. It  had  been  recognized  for  some  time  that  the  climates  of 
cities  differed  significantly  from  their  rural  environs  due  to  the  re- 
lease of  heat  and  pollutants.  It  was  not  until  the  late  1960's  that  evi- 
dence of  "urban  effect"  on  the  climate  at  considerable  distances  down- 
wind began  to  be  noticed.  The  role  of  pollution  aerosols 2  as  climate 
modifiers  became  a  topic  of  great  interest,  and  it  remains  so  today. 

In  the  United  States,  the  attention  of  the  Government  to  these 
problems  began  with  the  IGY  effort,  C02  and  solar  radiation  measure- 
ment programs  were  started  in  Antarctica  and  at  the  Mauna  Loa  Ob- 
servatory in  Hawaii,  which  was  established  specifically  for  this  pro- 
gram by  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau.  This  station,  located  at  an  eleva- 
tion of  3,400  meters  (11,155  feet)  on  the  north  slope  of  Mauna  Loa, 


2  Dispersions  in  tbe  atmosphere  of  particles  of  matter  that  remain  suspended  for  a  sig- 
nificant length  of  time. 


150 


has  been  improved  over  the  years  and  remains  the  prototype  "bench- 
mark" station  for  climatic  change  monitoring. 

The  first  major  meeting  devoted  exclusively  to  the  inadvertent 
modification  problem  convened  in  Dallas,  Tex.,  in  December  1968.3 

The  following  year,  a  series  of  discussions  between  some  faculty 
members  of  the  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology,  government 
officials  and  scientists  gave  rise  to  the  first  working  conference,  the 
Study  of  Critical  Environmental  Problems  (SCEP).  This  meeting, 
held  at  Williams  College,  Wihiamstown,  Mass.,  during  July  1970,  was 
devoted  to  identifying  possible  global  environmental  hazards  and 
making  recommendations  concerning  monitoring,  abatement,  et  cetera. 
The  climatic  problem  areas  identified  were  carbon  dioxide  and  other 
trace  gases  that  may  affect  climate ;  particulate  matter  in  the  atmos- 
phere as  turbidity  and  as  cloud  modifiers ;  waste  heat ;  changes  in  the 
Earth's  surface  (land-use  changes)  ;  radioactivity  in  the  atmosphere; 
and  jet  aircraft  pollution  of  the  high  troposphere  and  stratosphere. 
The  proceedings  of  this  meeting  were  published  by  the  MIT  Press.4' 5 

The  working  group  for  SCEP  was,  with  one  exception,  composed  of 
residents  of  the  United  States :  scientists,  representatives  of  industrial 
management,  and  government  officials.  Some  of  the  participants  felt 
that  a  more  multinational  participation  would  be  essential  if  standard- 
ized global  programs  were  to  come  into  existence  as  a  result  of  such 
a  meeting.  Also,  it  was  the  opinion  that  the  problems  of  climate  modi- 
fication were  complex  enough  to  occupy  the  entire  attention  of  a  work- 
ing meeting.  As  a  result,  a  second  such  meeting  was  held,  this  time  in 
Stockholm,  with  scientists  from  14  countries  participating.  This  work- 
ing meeting  was  called  Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  Climate1  (SMIC). 
The  report  prepared  by  this  group  6  dealt  with  the  substantive  scien- 
tific questions  of  inadvertent  climate  modification,  including:  previous 
climatic  changes;  man's  activities  influencing  climate;  theory  and 
models  of  climatic  change;  climatic  effects  of  manmade  surface 
ciianges;  modification  of  the  troposphere; 7  and  modification  of  the 
stratosphere.8  One  objective  of  SMIC  was  to  provide  guidelines  for 
the  World  Meteorological  Organization  (WMO)  and  other  interna- 
tional agencies  to  use  in  establishing  monitoring  and  research  pro- 
grams on  a  global  scale. 

In  connection  with  the  study  of  inadvertent  climate  modification, 
much  was  iterated  in  the  early  1970's  about  the  need  for  global  moni- 
toring. Because  of  the  lagtime  in  planning,  financing,  and  construct- 
ing such  facilities  (which  must  necessarily  be  in  wilderness  areas  in 
order  to  give  representative  data  not  reflecting  local  effects),  the 
minimum  number  of  benchmark  stations  (10)  considered  necessary 
has  not  yet  been  reached.  Five  stations  are  currently  in  operation. 
Mauna  Loa  Observatory  (MLO),  the  oldest,  was  established  by  the 

3  Singer,  S.  F.,  "Global  Effects  of  Environmental  Pollution,"  New  York.  Springer-Verlag, 

^Wilson  Carroll  L  ,  editor.  Man's  Imnact  on  the  Global  Environment,  Report  of  the 
Study  of  Critical  Environmental  Problems  (SCEP).  Cambridge,  MIT  Press,  1970,  319  pp. 

G  Matthews,  W.  H.,  W.  W.  Kellogg,  and  G.  D.  Robinson,  editors.  "Man's  Impact  on  the 
Climate."  Cambridge,  MIT  Tress.  1971,  r>*)4  pp- 

"Wilson  C  L  and  W  IT  Matthews,  editors,  Inadvertent  Climate  Modification,  Report 
of  the  Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  Climate  (SMIC).  Cambridge,  the  MIT  Press,  1971,  30S  pp. 

7  Troposphere — the  inner  layer  of  the  atmosphere  varying  in  height  from  0  to  12  miles. 
This  is  the  region  within  wMch  nearlv  all  weather  conditions  manifest  themselves. 

8  Stratosphere — the  region  of  the  atmosphere  outside  the  troposphere,  about  10  to  30 
miles  in  height. 


151 


U.S.  Weather  Bureau,  then  transferred  to  the  supervision  of  the 
Atmospheric  Physics  and  Chemistry  .Laboratory  of  the  Environ- 
mental Science  Services  Administration  in  I96ii  and  finally  to  the  Air 
Resources  Laboratory  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Ad- 
ministration (NOAA)  in  1971.  In  the  following  year,  the  NOAA  net- 
work was  officially  expanded  to  four  stations:  MLO;  South  Pole; 
Point  Barrow,  Alaska ;  and  American  Samoa.  The  other  operational 
station  is  located  at  Kislovodsk,  North  Caucasus,  in  tne  U.S.S.E.  The 
Government  of  Canada  has  plans  for  three  high  latitude  northern 
stations,  and  some  limited  monitoring  activities  are  conducted  in  Aus- 
tralia and  New  Zealand. 

In  addition  to  the  long-term  monitoring  program,  two  shorter 
programs  have  been  devoted  to  the  inadvertent  modification  problem. 
The  first  of  these,  the  Metropolitan  Meteorological  Experiment 
(Metromex),  was  directed  toward  a  concentrated  investigation  of 
downwind  eiiects  of  the  thermal  and  particulate  emissions  from  a  typi- 
cal metropolitan  area — St.  Louis,  Mo.  The  project  involved  an  exam- 
ination of  all  available  climatological  data  in  a  circle  around  the 
city,  plus  an  extensive  field  program  in  which  a  number  of  State 
and  Federal  Government  agencies  and  university  research  groups 
participated. 

The  objective  of  the  second  program  was  to  prepare  an  environmen- 
tal impact  statement  on  the  effects  of  supersonic  transport  aircraft. 
The  resulting  research  activity,  the  Climatic  Impact  Assessment  Pro- 
gram (CIAP),  involved  9  agencies  and  departments  of  the  Federal 
Government,  7  agencies  of  other  national  governments,  and  over  1,000 
individual  scientists  in  the  United  States  and  abroad.  The  program 
involved  data-collecting  activities  using  aircraft  and  balloons  in  the 
stratosphere,  development  of  new  techniques  for  sampling  and  measur- 
ing stratospheric  pollutants,  laboratory  work  in  the  photochemistry 
of  atmospheric  trace  gases,  measurement  of  pollutant  emission  by  air- 
craft engines,  mathematical  modeling  of  stratospheric  transport  proc- 
esses and  chemical  reactions  taking  place  there.9 

UNDERSTANDING  THE  CAUSES  OF  CLIMATIC  CHANGE  AND  VARIABILITY 

It  is  a  human  tendency  to  cling  to  the  belief  that  the  natural  environ- 
ment or  climate  to  ivhich  we  have  become  accustomed  will  remain  more 
or  less  the  same  from  year  to  year  and  from  decade  to  decade.  We  are 
surprised  and  alarmed  tohen  an  unusually  severe  winter  or  an  unusu- 
ally prolonged  drought  occurs,  because  our  memories  tend  to  be  too 
short  to  recall  past  years  when  things  were  equally  unusual. 

—William  W.  Kellogg,  1978 
National  Center  for  Atmospheric^  Research. 

The  facts  are  that  climate  everywhere  does  fluctuate  quite  noticeably 
from  year  to  year  and  that  there  are  gradual  changes  in  climate  that 
make  one  decade  or  one  century  different  from  the  one  before.  These 
yearly  fluctuations  and  longer  term  changes  have  been  the  result  of 
natural  processes  or  external  influences  at  work  on  the  complex  system 
that  determines  Earth's  climate.  It  is  a  system  that  seems  to  strive  for 
a  balance  among  atmosphere,  oceans,  land,  and  polar  ice  masses — all 

9  Barrett,  Earl  W.,  "Inadvertent  Weather  and  Climate  Modification."  Crtiical  Reviews  in 
Environmental  Control,  vol.  6,  No.  1,  December  1975,  pp.  15-90. 


152 


influenced  by  possible  solar  and  cosmic  variations  of  which  climate 
researchers'  knowledge  is  in  some  cases  nonexistent,  or  incomplete,  and 
otherwise  tenuous  at  best.  Society  itself  is  becoming  another  significant 
factor  in  the  climatic  balance. 

It  is  no  news,  for  example,  that  the  atmosphere  of  large  midlatitude 
cities  is  both  warmer  and  more  turbid  than  the  surrounding  country- 
side (particularly  in  winter)  as  a  result  of  thermal  and  chemical  pol- 
lution and  to  some  extent  because  of  the  ability  of  groups  of  buildings 
to  trap  heat  from  the  Sun.  There  is  also  good  evidence  for  increased 
summertime  rainfall  downwind  from  cities  such  as  St.  Louis,  Chicago, 
and  Paris.10  Indeed,  it  is  very  likely  that  the  industrialization  of  siz- 
able regions,  such  as  the  eastern  United  States  and  western  Europe, 
has  modified  their  climates  in  certain  more  subtle  ways.  In  any  attempt 
to  assess  a  manmade  climatic  effect,  it  is  essential  to  understand  and 
have  a  measure  of  the  degree  of  climatic  variability  which  may  be 
expected  in  the  absence  of  human  influence. 

The  concept  of  climatic  change  and  variability 

The  concept  of  climatic  change  and  variability  entails  a  wide  range 
of  complex  interactions  with  a  disparity  of  response  times  among  the 
air,  sea,  ice,  land,  and  biotic  components  of  the  climate  system.  Climate 
is  not  a  fixed  element  of  the  natural  environment.  Indeed,  important 
advances  in  climate  research  and  the  study  of  former  climates  confirm 
that  past  climates  of  Earth  have  changed  on  virtually  all  resolvable 
time  scales.  This  characteristic  suggests  that  there  is  no  reason  to 
assume  the  favorable  climatic  regime  of  the  last  several  decades  is 
permanent  and,  moreover,  that  climatic  change  and  variability  must 
be  recognized  and  dealt  with  as  a  fundamental  property  of  climate. 

In  this  matter  it  is  important  to  appreciate  the  fact  that  a  renewed 
appreciation  of  the  inherent  variability  of  climate  has  manifested 
itself  in  the  public  consciousness.  Climate  has  not  become  suddenly 
more  variable  in  a  way  that  it  has  never  been  variable  before,  but  events 
of  recent  years 11  have  shaken  a  somewhat  false  sense  of  technological 
invulnerability.  Thus,  climatic  variability  is  a  media  item  now  because 
society  ignored  for  so  long  its  continued  dependence  on  the  ecological/ 
climatic  balance  achieved,  and  then  failed  to  plan  systematically  for 
the  coming  unfavorable  years,  which  eventually  had  to  come — and 
always  will,  given  the  nature  of  the  atmosphere.  It  is  more  palatable 
to  blame  climate  for  present  predicaments  than  to  acquiesce  to  a  lack 
of  preparedness.  As  F.  Kenneth  Hare,  climatologist  with  the  Science 
Council  of  Canada,  has  noted : 

It  is  paramount  that  the  [climate- related]  events  of  1972  do  not  repeat  them- 
selves, even  if  bad  weather  does.  It  does  not  matter  whether  such  events  are  part 
of  a  genuine  change  in  climate  or  are  merely  unusually  large  fluctuations  of  a 
basically  unchanging  system.  In  fact,  I  doubt  whether  such  arguments  mean  any- 
thing. It  does  matter  that  climatic  extremes  do  occur ;  that  they  have  recently 
become  rather  frequent  and  have  had  severe  impacts ;  that  we  lack  the  predic- 


10  Dettwiller,  J.  W.  and  S.  A.  Changnon,  "Possible  Urban  Effects  on  Maximum  Daily 
Rainfall  Rates  at  Paris,  St.  Louis,  and  Chicago."  Journal  of  Applied  Meteorology,  vol.  15, 

May  1976.  pp.  517-519. 

11  Most  of  the  world's  important  grain-growing  regions  experienced  unfavorable  weather 
and  crop  failures  in  1972  or  1974.  or  both.  Tbo  winter  of  1977  was  perceived  by  most  Amer- 
icans as  remarkably  abnormal,  with  severe  cold  in  the  East  (coldest,  in  fact,  since  the 
founding  of  the  Republic),  drought  in  the  West,  and  mild  temperatures  ns  far  north  as 
Alaska  :  and  the  summer  of  1977  was  one  of  the  two  or  three  hottest  in  the  last  100  years 
over  most  of  the  United  States. 


153 


tive  skill  to  avoid  impacts  on  food  production — and  energy  consumption;  and 
that  we  [the  atmospheric  science  community]  are  insufficiently  organized  to  make 
maximum  use  of  existing  skill.12 

While  scientists  concur  that  climate  is  not  a  fixed  component  of  the 
natural  environment,  there  is  less  agreement  with  regard  to  when 
and  how  climatic  change  occurs.  Although  in  the  long  term  a  major 
natural  change  to  a  different  climatic  regime  may  be  expected,  it  is 
unlikely  that  any  trend  toward  such  a  change  would  be  perceptible  in 
the  near  term,  as  it  could  be  obscured  by  large  amplitude,  shorter  term 
climatic  variability.  Considered  from  a  historical  perspective,  and 
judging  from  the  record  of  past  interglacial  ages,  climatic  data  indi- 
cate that  the  long-term  trend  over  the  next  20,000  or  so  years  is  toward 
a  cooling  cycle,  a  cooler  climate,  and  eventually  the  next  glacial  age. 
The  onset  of  that  change  may  be  a  number  of  centuries  or  millennia 
away ;  conceivably  it  may  already  have  begun.  In  recent  years,  books 
and  newspaper  stories  have  conditioned  us  to  expect  colder  weather  in 
the  future.  In  geological  perspective,  the  case  for  cooling  is  strong. 
The  modern-day  world  is  experiencing  an  interglacial  period,  a  rela- 
tively warm  interlude — lasting  many  thousands  of  years — between 
longer  intervals  of  cold.  If  this  interglacial  age  lasts  no  longer  than  a 
dozen  earlier  ones  in  the  past  million  years,  as  recorded  in  deep-sea 
sediments,  we  may  reasonably  suppose  that  the  world  is  about  due  to 
begin  a  slide  into  the  next  ice  age.  It  does  seem  probable,  though,  that 
this  transition  would  be  sufficiently  gradual  so  that  in  the  next  100  to 
200  years  it  would  be  almost  imperceptible  amid  the  ubiquitous  varia- 
bility of  climate.13, 14> 15 

Considering  the  much  more  recent  past,  climatologists  point  out 
that  the  world  has  been  in  the  throes  of  a  general  cooling  trend  during 
the  last  SO  or  40.  years.  Because  this  modern-day  cooling  trend  has 
sometimes  been  misinterpreted  as  an  early  sign  of  the  approach  of  an 
ice  age  (it  really  is  only  one  of  many  irregular  ups  and  downs  of 
climate  that  mankind  has  witnessed  through  Jiistory ) ,  it  has  reenf  orced 
the  popular  notion  that  our  future  is  likely  to  be  a  cold  one.  (In  point 
of  fact,  this  cooling  trend  has  been  faltering  in  very  recent  years,  and 
may  already  have  started  to  reverse  itself.) 

Writes  research  climatologist  J.  Murray  Mitchell,  Jr. : 

I  agree  with  those  climatologists  who  say  that  another  ice  age  is  inevitable. 
I  strongly  disagree,  however,  with  those  who  suggest  that  the  arrival  of  the  next 
ice  age  is  imminent,  and  who  speak  of  this  as  the  proper  concern  of  modern 
civilization  in  planning  for  the  next  few  decades  or  centuries.  Should  nature  be 
left  to  her  own  devices,  without  interference  from  man,  I  feel  confident  in  pre- 
dicting that  future  climate  would  alternately  warm  and  cool  many  times  before 
shifting  with  any  real  authority  toward  the  next  ice  age.  It  would  be  these 
alternate  warmings  and  coolings,  together  with  more  of  the  same  ubiquitous, 
year-to-year  variability  of  climate  that  has  always  been  with  us,  that  would  be 
the  appropriate  object  of  our  concerns  about  climate  in  the  foreseeable  future.16 

12Norwine,  Jim,  "A  Question  of  Climate,"  Environment,  vol.  19,  No.  8,  November  1977, 
p.  12. 

13  National  Research  Council,  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research  Pro- 
gram, Understanding  Climntic  Change :  A  Program  for  Action,  Washington,  National 
Academy  of.Sciences.  1975,  239  pp. 

14  U.S.  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology  Interdepartmental  Committee  for 
Atmospheric  Sciences,  report  of  the  Ad  Hoc  Panel  on  the  Present  Interglacial,  Washington, 
National  Science  Foundation.  1974.  22  pp.  (ICAS  lSb-FY75). 

15  United  Nations.  World  Meteorological  Organizations  (WMO).  WMO  Statement  on  Cli- 
matic Chance,  pt.  B  :  technical  report,  p  9. 

19  Mitchell  J.  Murray.  Jr..  "Carbon  Dioxide  and  Future  Climate,"  EDS  [Environmental 
Data  Service]  magazine,  March  1977,  p.  4. 


154 


Because  of  man's  presence  on  the  Earth,  however,  what  will  actually 
happen  in  future  decades  and  centuries  may  well  follow  a  different 
scenario ;  imperceptibly  different  at  first,  but  significantly  so  later  on, 
covering  a  full  spectrum  of  climatic  possibilities  ranging  from  warm- 
ing to  cooling  trends.  Varying  interpretations  of  this  evidence  have 
led,  on  one  hand,  to  a  scientifically  valid  caution  regarding  possible 
instability  of  present-day  climate  conditions  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to 
predictions  that  the  Earth  may  be  on  the  verge  of  a  new  climate  regime, 
which  implies  a  new  equilibrium  among  the  elements  of  the  climatic 
system,  involving  a  somewhat  different  set  of  constraints  and,  almost 
certainly,  noticeable  regional  shifts  of  climate.  Climate  researchers 
iteratively  emphasize  the  importance  of  recognizing  and  appreciating 
the  inherent  variability  of  climate,  a  fact  which  may  be  more  signifi- 
cant than  the  uncertainty  of  whether  recent  events  portend  a  trend 
toward  a  warmer  or  cooler  climate  of  the  future. 

When  and  how  do  climatic  changes  occur? 

So  far,  there  is  no  single  comprehensive  theory,  or  even  a  combina- 
tion of  a  small  number  of  theories,  that  completely  explains — much  less 
predicts — climatic  fluctuations  or  change.  As  yet,  there  is  no  deter- 
ministic, predictive  model  of  our  planet's  climate,  and,  until  one  is 
developed,  predictions  are  as  valid  as  the  logic  producing  them.  The 
periods  of  time  involved  in  climatic  predictions  cover  centuries,  and 
the  validity  of  climate  forecasting  is  not  easily  tested.  Nevertheless, 
there  are  some  factors  and  processes  that  clearly  should  be  taken  into 
account,  either  in  terms  of  observed  correlations  in  the  past  or  of 
theoretical  assumptions  about  what  should  be  important.  All,  in  one 
way  or  another,  effect  changes  and  variability  of  climate  by  modifying 
the  natural  thermal  balance  of  the  atmosphere. 

One  group  of  processes  responsible  for  climatic  change  and  varia- 
bility consists  of  external  mechanisms,  including:  fluctuations  of  the 
Sun's  radiative  output,  variations  of  Earth's  orbital  parameters, 
changes  in  atmospheric  dust  content,  changes  in  levels  of  carbon  diox- 
ide and  ozone  in  the  atmosphere,  and  migration  of  land  masses  and 
shifting  of  continental  plates. 

In  addition  to  being  influenced  by  external  forcing  mechanisms, 
climate  is,  to  a  certain  degree,  regulated  by  processes  internal  to  the 
climatic  system,  involving  "feedback"  interactions  between  the  at- 
mosphere, the  world  ocean,  the  ice  masses,  the  land  surface,  and  the 
biosphere.  If  an  external  variable  were  to  be  changed  by  a  certain  fac- 
tor, the  response  of  the  climatic  system  to  that  change  could  be  modi- 
fied by  the  actions  of  these  internal  processes  which  act  as  feedbacks 
on  the  climatic  system  modifying  its  evolution.  There  are  some  feed- 
backs which  are  stabilizing,  and  some  which  are  destabilizing;  that  is, 
they  may  intensify  deviations. 

In  all  likelihood,  climatic  change  is  a  function  of  various  combina- 
tions of  interacting  physical  factors,  external  processes,  internal  proc- 
esses, and  synergistic  associations  (see  fig.  2),  but  it  is  not  yet  clear  to 
what  extent  the  observed  variability  of  the  climatic  system  originates 
from  internal  mechanisms,  and  to  what  extent  from  external  mecha- 
nisms. It  appears  likely  that  the  answer  depends  upon  the  time  scale 
of  variability,  with  internal  processes  probably  important  on  the  scale 
of  months  and  decades,  and  external  mechanisms  becoming  increas- 
ingly important  on  time  scale's  beyond  a  cent  ury  as  depicted  in  figure  3. 


155 


Changes  of 
Solar  Radiation 


I 


ATMOSPHERE 


terrestrial 
radiation 


H,0,  NJ(  Oj,  COJ(  03,  etc. 
Aerosol 


precipitation 


atmosphere-land  coupling     atmosphere-ice  coupling 
1j  BIOMASS 


changes  of 
atmospheric  composition 


changes  of  land  features, 
orography,  vegetation, 
albedo,  etc. 


Figure  2. — Schematic  illustration  of  the  components  of  the  coupled  atmosphere- 
ocean-ice-land  surface-biota  climatic  system.  The  full  arrows  are  ex- 
amples of  external  mechanisms,  and  the  open  arrows  are  examples  of 
internal  mechanisms  of  climatic  change. 

Source:  Living  With  Climatic  Change.  Proceedings  of  a  conference/workshop  held  in 
Toronto,  November  17-22,  1975.  Ottawa,  Science  Council  of  Canada,  1976,  p.  85. 


SoUr  Variability 


Earth's  Rotation, 
Polar  Wandering 


LIMIT 
OF  LOCAL 
WEATHER 
PREDICTION 


Continental  Drift 


Sea-Floor  Spreading 
-* —  Mountain  Building 


Atmospheric  Mass,  Composition,  Volcanic  Dust 
Earth's 

♦   Orbital   »- 

Parameters 


Mountain 
"  Glaciers 


Continental  Ice  Sheets 


Sea  Ice 


Snow 
Cover 


Sea-level,  Lake  Level,  Isostatic  Adjustment 


Oceanic  Composition, 
Sedimentation 


AGE  OF 
EARTH 


MAJOR 
GLACIAL 
INTERVAL 


Ocean 

-*  Bottom  — 

Water 

DOMINANT  ^  

PLEISTOCENE 
GLACIAL        —  Vegetal  Cover 
INTERVAL 


 Surface  

Ocean  Layer 


Man's  Land  Use 


-Pollutants,  CO, 


Autovariation  of 
"Ocean-Atmosphere 


Autovariation 
of  Atmosphere 

I  I 


10* 


10* 


107 


10* 


10*         10*  10* 
Time  in  years 


103 


10' 


Figure  3.— Characteristic  climatic  events  and  processes  in  the  atmosphere,  hydro- 
sphere, cryosphere.  lithosphere,  and  biosphere  and  possible  causative  factors  or 
global  climatic  change. 

Source  :  National  Research  Council.  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research 
Program.  Understanding  Climatic  Change  :  A  Program  for  Action.  Washington,  National 
Academy  of  Sciences,  1975,  p.  22. 


156 


For  a  comprehensive  and  detailed  discussion  of  the  mechanisms  and 
factors  governing  climatic  change  and  variability,  see  "A  Primer  on 
Climatic  Variation  and  Change"  ( 1976)  .17 

The  possibility  also  exists  that  society  may  be  changing  the  climate 
through  its  own  actions  by  pushing  on  certain  leverage  points.  Our 
presence  on  Earth  cannot  be  assumed  to  go  unnoticed  by  the  atmos- 
phere, and  human  intervention  now  presents  possibilities  that  have 
never  existed  in  the  historic  or  geologic  past.  At  question  is  whether 
the  effects  of  civilized  existence  are  yet  capable  of  altering  Earth's 
heat  balance  and,  hence,  impacting  climate  on  a  global  scale  to  an  im- 
portant extent.  Enormous  amounts  of  gaseous  and  particulate  mate- 
rials have  been  emitted  into  the  atmosphere  through  the  combustion 
of  fossil  fuels  (primarily  carbon  dioxide,  sulfur  dioxide,  and  fly  ash) 
and  through  the  manipulation  of  land  for  agriculture  and  commerce 
(primarily  windblown  dust,  and  forest  and  grass  fire  smoke).  To 
an  increasing  extent,  waste  heat  is  also  entering  the  atmosphere,  both 
directly  and  indirectly  (via  rivers  and  estuaries)  and  in  both  sensible 
and  latent  form  (as,  for  example,  through  evaporation  in  wet  cooling 
towers).  Moreover,  large-scale  land  management  programs  have  been 
responsible  for  significant  changes  in  reflective  properties,  moisture 
holding  capacity,  and  aerodynamic  roughness  of  the  surface  (pri- 
marily through  deforestation,  water  impoundment  by  manmade  lakes, 
slash-burn  agriculture  practices,  urbanization,  and  so  forth).  In  view 
of  the  growth  of  population,  industry,  food  production,  and  commerce 
in  the  years  and  decades  ahead,  the  time  is  almost  certainly  not  far 
off  when  human  effects  on  large-scale  climate  would  become  appreci- 
able in  relation  to  natural  phenomena  leading  to  changes  and  vari- 
ability of  climate. 

It  does  seem  likely  that  industrial  man  already  has  started  to  have 
an  impact  on  global  climate,  although  this  is  difficult  to  prove  by  direct 
observation,  because  the  impact  is  not  easily  recognizable  amid  the 
large  natural  variability  of  climate.  "If  man  continues  his  ever- 
growing consumption  of  energy,"  contends  J.  Murray  Mitchell,  "and 
in  the  process  adds  further  pollution  to  the  global  atmosphere,  it  may 
not  be  very  many  years  or  decades  before  his  impact  will  break  through 
the  'noise  level'  in  the  record  of  natural  climatic  variability  and 
become  clearly  recognizable." 18  Furthermore,  the  most  significant 
impacts  that  mankind  would  probably  have  on  the  climatic  system 
are  apparently  all  in  the  same  direction  as  far  as  global  mean  tempera- 
tures are  concerned  and  are  likely  to  constitute  a  warming  trend.19 

The  Facts  About  Inadvertent  Weather  and  Climate  Modification 
airborne  particulate  matter  and  atmospheric  turbidity 

Particulate  matter  in  the  atmosphere  may  significantly  affect  climate 
by  influencing  the  Earth's  radiation  balance  (figure  4)  and/or  cloud 
nucleation  and  precipitation. 

17  Justus.  John  R..  "Mechanisms  and  Factors  Governing  Climatic  Variation  and  Change.'' 
In  "A  Primer  on  Climntic  Variation  and  Change,"  prepared  by  the  Congressional  Research 
Service,  Library  of  Congress,  for  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere 
of  the  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  U.S.  House  of  Representatives.  94th  Cong., 
2d  sess.  (committee  print).  Washington.  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  197G,  pp.  77-127. 

18  Mitchell,  J.  Murrav.  Jr..  "Carbon  Dioxide  and  Future  Climate,"  p.  4. 

Jt>  Kellogg.  William  W..  "Is  Mankind  Warming  the  Earth?"  Bulletin  of  the  Atomic  Scien- 
tists, vol.  34,  February  1978,  pp.  10-19. 


157 


Do  more  particles  mean  a  warming  or  cooling? 

There  is  a  question  as  to  whether  more  particles  mean  a  warming 
or  cooling  of  the  lower  atmosphere.  The  general  cooling  trend  of  the 
last  30  to  40  years  (which  some  experts  feel  may  have  bottomed  out 
and  already  started  to  reverse  itself)  could  have  been  a  result  of  a 
reduction  of  solar  radiation  reaching  the  surface  of  the  Earth  because 
of  particulates  that  have  been  scattered  into  the  atmosphere  by  man's 
activities,  among  them :  the  burning  of  fossil  fuels,  mechanized  agri- 
cultural operations,  overgrazing  of  arid  lands,  manmade  forest  fires, 
and  the  slash -burn  method  of  clearing  land  for  crops,  which  is  still 
widely  employed  in  the  Tropics.  But  if  man  started  his  polluting 
processes  in  the  last  century,  and  the  decrease  of  global  temperature 
were  due  to  alteration  in  the  transparency  of  the  atmosphere,  then 
why  has  a  decrease  in  temperature  not  been  observed  earlier?  It  is 
possible  that  instruments  were  measuring  a  natural  climatic  trend 
that  may  have  been  only  somewhat  augmented  by  the  byproducts  of 
resource  development,  power  generation,  and  industrial  activities. 

The  situation  is  such  that  the  net  effect  of  a  given  particle  on  Earth's 
heat  balance  and  hence  on  climate  depends,  in  large  part,  upon  the 
nature  (number  and  size)  of  the  particles,  where  in  the  atmosphere 
they  are  found,  and  how  long  they  remain  suspended.  Some  aerosols, 
such  as  lead  from  auto  exhaust,  are  rapidly  scavenged  by  precipitation. 
Others,  mostly  organic  particles  such  as  pesticides,  may  remain  for 
months  or  years.  While  short-term  aerosols  such  as  lead  may  affect 
weather  on  a  local  scale,  it  is  the  aerosols  that  remain  and  accumulate 
in  the  atmosphere  that  will  have  long-term  effects  on  climate. 


Figure  4. — The  mean  annual  radiation  and  heat  balance  of  the  atmosphere, 
relative  to  100  units  of  incoming  solar  radiation,  based  on  satellite  measure- 
ments and  conventional  observations. 

Source  :  National  Research  Council.  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research 
Program.  Understanding  Climatic  Change  :  A  Program  for  Action,  Washington,  National 
Academy  of  Sciences,  1975,  p.  18. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  13 


158 


Idso  and  Brazel  reporting  on  their  research  results  in  the  November 
18,  1977  issue  of  Science  magazine  found  that  initial  increases  in 
atmospheric  dust  concentration  tend  to  warm  the  Earth's  surface. 
After  a  certain  critical  concentration  has  been  reached,  continued  dust 
buildup  reduced  this  warming  effect  until,  at  a  second  critical  dust 
concentration,  a  cooling  trend  begins.  But,  they  explain,  this  second 
critical  dust  concentration  is  so  great  that  any  particulate  pollution  of 
the  lower  atmosphere  will  have  the  inexorable  tendency  to  increase 
surface  temperatures.  The  authors  pointed  out  that  if,  and  when,  man- 
generated,  industrial  pollution  of  the  atmosphere  as  a  source  of  par- 
ticulates ever  becomes  climatologically  significant,  the  resultant  sur- 
face temperature  trend  will  definitely  be  one  of  warming,  not  cooling. 
Thus,  whereas  many  groups  assigned  to  assess  the  problem  have  looked 
on  this  aspect  of  intensified  industrialization  as  acting  as  a  "brake" 
on  the  warming  influence  inferred  lately  of  increased  carbon  dioxide 
production,20  just  the  opposite  is  actually  the  case — the  two  phenomena 
could  tend  to  complement  each  other.21 

Sources  of  atmospheric  particulates:  natural  against  manmade 

Of  course,  not  all  aerosols  in  the  Earth's  atmosphere,  or  even  a  major 
proportion,  are  attributable  to  human  activity.  In  fact,  dust  from  vol- 
canic eruptions,  sea  salt  from  evaporated  ocean  spray,  smoke  from 
lightning-caused  forest  fires  (see  fig.  5),  debris  from  meteors  which 
burn  up  in  the  atmosphere,  windblown  dust  or  sandstorms,  and  organic 
compounds  emitted  by  vegetation  are  much  larger  sources  of  atmos- 
pheric particulates  than  human  activity.  Scientists  at  Stanford  Uni- 
versity estimate  that  natural  processes  produce  about  2,312  million 
tons  of  aerosols  a  year,  which  amount  to  88.5  percent  of  the  total. 
Man  and  his  activities  account  for  only  296  million  tons,  the  remaining 
11.5  percent.  At  present,  it  is  unlikely  that  man's  activities  and  man- 
made  aerosols  will  affect  global  temperatures.  It  is  important  to  note, 
however,  that  while  aerosols  from  natural  sources  are  distributed 
fairly  evenly  across  the  planet,  man,  in  contrast,  contributes  high  con- 
centrations mostly  from  industrial  centers.  Atmospheric  scientists  at 
the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration's  Atmospheric 
Physics  and  Chemistry  Laboratory  found  that  the  296  million  tons  of 
manmade  aerosols  are  produced  every  year  on  only  about  2.5  percent 
of  the  surface  of  the  globe.  Within  these  limited  areas,  manmade 
aerosols  account  for  nearly  84  percent  of  the  total.  It  follows,  then, 
that  these  aerosols  may  be  expected  to  have  noticeable  effects  on  local 
weather  and  urban  climates. 


20  See,  generally,  National  Research  Council.  Geophysics  Research  Board,  "Energy  and 
Climate,"  Washington,  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  1977,  281  pp. 

21  Idso,  Sherwood  B.  and  Anthony  J.  Brazel,  "Planetary  Radiation  Balance  RB  a  Function 
of  Atmospheric  Dust :  Climatological  Consequences,"  Science,  vol.  198,  Nov.  18,  1977,  pp. 
731-733. 


159 


Figure  5. — Not  all  aerosols  in  the  Earth's  atmosphere  are  attributable  to  human 
activity.  In  this  Landsat  photo,  smoke  from  a  fire  in  the  Seney  National  Forest, 
upper  peninsula  of  Michigan,  serves  as  a  source  of  atmospheric  particulates. 
Note  the  extent  of  the  dust  veil  downwind  of  the  source.  ( Courtesy  of  National 
Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration. ) 

Atmospheric  processes  affected  by  particles 

Everyday,  particles  of  soot,  smoke,  dust,  and  chemicals  from  indus- 
trial combustion  and  other  activities  are  emitted  into  the  urban  atmos- 
phere. About  80  percent  of  the  solid  contaminants  are  small  enough  to 
remain  suspended  in  the  air,  sometimes  for  several  days.22  Even  though 
these  tiny  particles  reflect  and  scatter  sunlight  ostensibly  keeping  its 
heat  from  reaching  the  ground,  they  also  can  act  as  a  lid  to  prevent 
the  outflow  of  heat  from  the  land  surface  to  the  atmosphere.  In  a  sense, 
this  turbidity  acts  as  an  insulator.  It  reduces  the  amount  of  sunlight 
received  at  the  top  of  the  city  in  the  daytime  and  cuts  down  on  a  source 
of  heat.  However,  at  night  urban  aerosol  pollutants  retard  the  depar- 
ture of  radiant  energy  from  the  heated  city  air,  encasing  the  heat  in 


22  "Do  Cities  Change  the  Weather?"  Mosaic,  vol.  5,  summer  1974,  pp.  33,  34. 


160 


the  city's  closed  atmospheric  system.  Certain  aerosols  may  undergo 
chemical  change  when  they  combine  with  water  vapor  in  the  presence 
of  solar  radiation.  There  are  many  complicated  processes  that  can 
generate  aerosol  gas-to-particle  conversions,  and  the  particles  can  then 
grow  by  surface  chemistry  and  physical  accretion.23 

Perhaps  the  most  sensitive  atmospheric  processes  which  can  be 
affected  by  air  pollutants  are  those  involved  in  the  development  of 
clouds  and  precipitation.  The  formation  and  building  of  clouds  over 
a  city  can  be  influenced  by  the  presence  of  pollutants  acting  as  nuclei 
upon  which  water  vapor  condenses  and  by  the  hot  dry  air  with  which 
these  aerosols  are  swept  into  the  base  of  the  clouds  (see  fig.  6).  The 
structure  of  clouds  with  temperatures  below  0°  C  (defined  as  cold 
clouds)  can  be  modified,  and  under  certain  conditions  precipitation 
from  them  altered,  by  particles  which  are  termed  ice  nuclei.24  The  con- 
centrations of  natural  ice  nuclei  in  the  air  appear  to  be  very  low :  Only 
about  one  in  a  billion  atmospheric  particles  which  are  effective  as  ice 
nuclei  at  temperatures  above  about  — 15°  C  have  the  potential  for  mod- 
ifying the  structure  of  clouds  and  the  development  of  precipitation. 
If  the  concentration  of  anthropogenic  ice  nuclei  is  about  1  in  100  mil- 
lion airborne  particles,  the  result  may  be  an  enhancement  of  precipita- 
tion ;  however,  if  the  concentration  is  greatly  in  excess  of  1  in  100  mil- 
lion, the  result  may  be  a  tendency  to  "overseed"  cold  clouds  and  reduce 
precipitation.  Certain  steel  mills  have  been  identified  as  sources  of  ice 
nuclei.  Also  of  concern  is  the  possibility  that  emissions  from  automo- 
biles may  combine  with  trace  chemicals  in  the  atmosphere  to  produce 
ice  nuclei.25 

23  Hobhs.  P.  V..  H.  Harrison,  E.  Robinson,  "Atmospheric  Effects  of  Pollutants."  Science, 
vol.  183,  Mar.  8,  1974.  p.  910. 

2i  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences.  "Weather  and  Climate 
Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  Washington,  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  1973, 
pp.  41-47. 

25  Hobbs,  P.  V.,  H.  Harrison,  E.  Robinson,  "Atmospheric  Effects  of  Pollutants,"  p.  910. 


161 


Figure  6. — The  formation  and  building  of  clouds  can  be  influenced  by  the  pres- 
ence of  pollutants  acting  as  nuclei  upon  which  water  vapor  condenses  and  by  the 
hot  dry  air  with  which  these  aerosols  are  swept  aloft.  In  this  Landsat  photo, 
excess  particles  as  well  as  heat  and  moisture  produced  by  the  industries  of  Gary, 
Ind..  favor  the  development  of  clouds  downwind.  The  body  of  water  shown  is 
the  southern  tip  of  Lake  Michigan.  (Courtesy  of  National  Aeronautics  and 
Space  Administration.) 

Precipitation  from  clouds  that  have  temperatures  above  0°  C  (warm 
clouds)  may  be  modified  by  particles  which  serve  as  cloud  condensa- 
tion nuclei  (CCN).  A  source  that  produces  comparatively  low  con- 
centrations of  very  efficient  CCN  will  tend  to  increase  precipitation 
from  warm  clouds,  whereas  one  that  produces  large  concentrations 
of  somewhat  less  efficient  CCN  might  decrease  precipitation.  Modi- 
fications in  the  structure  of  clouds  and  precipitation  have  been  observed 


162 


many  miles  downwind  of  fires  and  pulp  and  paper  mills.  Large  wood- 
waste  burners  and  aluminum  smelters  have  also  been  identified  as 
major  sources  of  CCN.26 

The  La  Porte  tveather  anomaly:  urban  climate  modification 

La  Porte,  Ind.,  is  located  east  of  major  steelmills  and  other  indus- 
tries south  of  Chicago.  Analysis  of  La  Porte  records  revealed  that, 
since  1925,  La  Porte  had  shown  a  precipitation  increase  of  between 
30  and  40  percent.  Between  1951  and  1965,  La  Porte  had  31  percent 
more  precipitation,  38  percent  more  thunderstorms,  and  246  percent 
more  hail  days  than  nearby  weather  stations  in  Illinois,  Indiana, 
and  Michigan.27  Reporting  on  this  anomaly  at  a  national  meeting  of 
the  American  Meteorological  Society  in  1968,  Stanley  Changnon,  a 
climatologist  with  the  Illinois  State  Water  Survey  pointed  out  that 
the  precipitation  increase  in  La  Porte  closely  followed  the  upward 
curve  of  iron  and  steel  production  at  Chicago  and  Gary,  Ind.  Fur- 
thermore, La  Porte's  runs  of  bad  weather  correlated  closely  with 
periods  when  Chicago's  air  pollution  was  bad.  Stated  simply,  Ohang- 
non's  theory  was  that  if  this  effect  did  not  occur  by  chance,  then  the 
increase  in  precipitation  comd  be  caused  by  the  excess  particles 
as  well  as  heat  and  moisture  produced  by  the  industries  upwind 
of  La  Porte.  Pollutants  from  the  industrial  sources,  it  seemed,  were 
serving  as  nuclei  to  trigger  precipitation,  just  as  silver  iodide  crystals 
are  used  to  seed  clouds  in  deliberate  efforts  of  weather  modification.28 
The  discovery  of  the  La  Porte  anomaly  helped  usher  in  considerable 
scientific  and  public  concern  as  to  whether  cities  could  measurably 
alter  precipitation  and  severe  weather  in  and  downwind  of  them.  A 
large  urban-industrial  center  is  a  potential  source  of  many  conditions 
needed  to  produce  rainfall.  These  include  its  release  of  additional 
heat  (through  combustion  and  from  "storage"  in  surfaces  and  build- 
ings) which  lifts  the  air ;  the  mechanical  mixing  due  to  the  "mountain 
effects"  of  a  city  existing  in  flat  terrain ;  additional  moisture  released 
through  cooling  towers  and  other  industrial  processes ;  and  the  addi- 
tion  of  many  small  particles  (aerosols),  which  could  serve  as  nuclei 
for  the  formation  of  cloud  droplets  and  raindrops. 

The  interest  in  whether  urban  emissions  into  the  atmosphere  could 
trigger  changes  in  weather  and  climate  on  a  scale  much  larger  than 
the  city  itself  led  to  climatological  studies  of  other  cities.  Historical 
data  for  1901-70  from  Chicago.  St.  Louis,  Washington,  D.C.,  Cleve- 
land, Xew  Orleans,  Houston,  Indianapolis,  and  Tulsa  were  studied  in 
an  effort  to  discern  whether  cities  of  other  sizes,  different  industrial 
bases,  and  varying  climatic-physiographic  areas  also  experienced  rain- 
fall changes.  The  six  largest  cities — Washington,  Houston,  New 
Orleans,  Chicago,  Cleveland,  and  St.  Louis — all  altered  their  summer 
precipitation  in  a  rather  marked  fashion:  Precipitation  increases  of 
LOto  30  percenl  in  and  downwind  of  t  heir  urban  locales,  plus  associated 
increases  in  thunderstorm  and  hailstorm  activity  were  documented. 

16  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "Weather  and  Climate 
Modification  :  Prohlems  and  Progress."  p.  50. 

»  Lansford.  Henry,  "We're  Changing  the  Weather  hy  Accident,"  Science  Digest,  vol.  74, 
Dec.  1973,  p.  21. 

M  Changnon.  S.  A.,  Jr..  "The  La  Porte  Weather  Anomaly — Fact  or  Fiction?"  Bulletin  of 
the  American  Meterologlcal  Society,  vol.  49,  January  19G8,  pp.  4-11. 


163 


Tulsa  and  Indianapolis,  cities  of  lower  population  and  lesser  physio- 
graphic irregularities  than  the  others  studied,  did  not  reveal  any 
precipitation  anomalies.29 

The  key  questions  that  could  not  be  answered  conclusively  at  the 
completion  of  these  climatic  studies  were  (1)  whether  the  anomalies 
found  were  real  (or  adequately  measured)  ;  (2)  if  real,  what  was 
causing  the  anomalies;  and  (3)  whether  and  how  extensive  the  anoma- 
lies were  around  other  cities.  To  this  end,  a  major  atmospheric  pro- 
gram dealing  with  inadvertent  weather  modification  was  initiated 
by  a  group  of  scientists  in  1971.  The  Metropolitan  Meteorological 
Experiment  (METROMEX)  was  designed  by  four  research  groups 
who  received  support  from  Federal  agencies  and  one  State  (Illinois). 
St.  Louis  was  chosen  as  the  site  of  extensive  field  investigations  in  this 
first  major  field  program  aimed  at  studying  the  reality  and  causes  of 
urban  rainfall  anomalies  suggested  in  the  climatological  surveys  con- 
ducted previously.30 

Although  data  analysis  and  report  preparation  continue  (summer 
1975  was  the  fifth  and  final  year  for  field  work),  METROMEX  data 
thus  far  portray  statistically  significant  increases  in  summer  rainfall, 
heavy  (more  than  2.5  cm)  rainstorms,  thunderstorms  and  hail  in  and 
just  east  (downtown)  of  St.  Louis.  Examination  of  the  rainfall  yield  of 
individual  showers,  the  spatial  distribution  of  rain  developments,  and 
areal  distribution  of  afternoon  rain  clearly  point  to  the  urban-indus- 
trial complex  as  the  site  for  the  favored  initiation  of  the  rain  process 
under  certain  conditions.31 

Writes  climatologist  Stanley  Changnon : 

The  greater  frequency  of  rain  initiations  over  the  urban  and  industrial  areas 
appears  to  be  tied  to  three  urban-related  factors  including  thermodynamic 
effects  leading  to  more  clouds  and  greater  in-cloud  instability,  mechanical  and 
thermodynamic  effects  that  produce  confluence  zones  where  clouds  initiate,  and 
enhancement  of  the  [raindrop]  coalescence  process  due  to  giant  nuclei.  Case 
studies  reveal  that  once  additional  [rainstorm]  cells  are  produced,  nature,  cou- 
pled with  the  increased  likelihood  for  merger  with  more  storms  per  unit  area, 
takes  over  and  produces  heavier  rainfalls.  Hence  the  city  is  a  focal  point  for 
both  rain  initiation  and  rain  enhancement  under  conditions  when  rain  is  likely.31 

Recapitulating,  METROMEX  researchers  have  found  that  rain, 
thunderstorms  and  hail  can  actually  maximize  within  cities  and  nearby 
areas,  particularly  in  those  downwind.  Such  locations  may  have  more 
storms,  and  they  are  more  intense,  last  longer  and  produce  more  rain 
and  hail  than  storms  in  surrounding  regions.  Apparently,  air  heated 
and  polluted  by  a  city  can  move  up  through  the  atmosphere  high 
enough  to  affect  clouds.  This  urban-modified  air  clearly  adds  to  the 
strength  of  convective  storms  and  increases  the  severity  of  precipita- 
tion. Urban  climatic  alterations  are  summarized  in  table  1. 

29  Huff,  F.  A.  and  S.  A.  Changnon,  Jr.,  "Precipitation  Modification  by  Major  Urban  Areas," 
Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  "54,  December  1973,  pp.  1220-1232. 

30  Changnon.  S.  A.,  F.  A.  Huff,  and  R.  G.  Semonin,  "Metromex  :  An  Investigation  of 
Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,"  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol. 
52,  October  1971,  pp.  958-967. 

si  "METROMEX  Update,"  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  57,  March 
1976,  pp.  304-308. 

32  Changnon,  S.  A.,  R.  G.  Semonin  and  F.  A.  Huff,  "A  Hypothesis  for  Urban  Rainfall 
Anomalies,"  Journal  of  Applied  Meteorology,  vol.  15,  June  1976,  pp.  544-560. 


164 


Table  1. — Some  urban  climatic  alterations  1 

Comparison  with  rural  environs 


Radiation : 

Global    10  to  20  percent  less. 

Ultraviolet : 

Low  sun   30  to  50  percent  less. 

High  sun   5  to  10  percent  less. 

Temperature : 

Annual  mean   1  to  2°  C  higher. 

Maximum  difference   3  to  10°  C  higher. 

Winter  minima   1  to  3°  C  higher. 

Cloudiness : 

General  cloud  cover   5  to  10  percent  more. 

Fog: 

Winter   100  percent  more. 

Summer   20  to  30  percent  more. 

Precipitation : 
Totals : 

Summer   10  percent  more. 

Winter   5  percent  more. 

Relative  humidity  :  Annual  mean   4  to  6  percent  less. 

Evapotranspiration :  Total  amount   30  to  60  percent  less. 

Dew :  Amounts   50  to  80  percent  less. 

Wind  speed  :  <  3  m  sec  -1   40  percent  less. 

Speeds : 

3  —  6  m  sec   20  percent  less. 

>  6  m  sec   10  percent  less. 

Thunderstorms :  Number  of  days   5  to  10  percent  more. 


1  After  Helmut  Landsberg,  University  of  Maryland. 

CARBON  DIOXIDE  AND  WATER  VAPOR 

The  constituent  gases  of  the  atmosphere  that  are  important  vari- 
ables affecting  the  distribution  of  temperature  within  the  atmosphere 
are  carbon  dioxide  and  water  vapor.  Capable  of  absorbing  important 
quantities  of  infrared  radiation,  they  both  have  a  role  in  modifying 
the  vertical  distribution  of  temperature  in  the  atmosphere  by  con- 
trolling the  flux  of  infrared  radiation.  The  absorption  of  incoming 
solar  radiation  by  these  gases  is  so  small  that  their  concentration  has 
no  appreciable  effect  on  the  amount  of  incoming  solar  radiation  reach- 
ing the  Earth's  surface.  Carbon  dioxide  and  water  vapor  are,  how- 
ever, opaque  to  major  portions  of  the  long- wave  radiation  emitted  by 
the  Earth's  surface.  The  greater  the  content  of  these  gases  the  greater 
the  opacity  of  the  atmosphere  to  infrared  radiation  and  the  higher  its 
temperature  must  be  to  radiate  away  the  necessary  amount  of  energy 
to  maintain  a  radiation  balance.  It  is  this  absorption  of  long-wave 
radiation  emitted  by  the  Earth,  with  the  subsequent  reradiation  of 
additional  infrared  radiation  to  the  ground  and  consequent  elevation 
of  air  temperatures  near  the  surface  that  is  known  as  the  "greenhouse 
effect." 

Increases  in  atmospheric  c<trhon  diowide  concentration:  what  the 
record  indicates 

Man  adds  carbon  dioxide  to  the  atmosphere  through  the  combustion 
of  fossil  fuels,  and  this  addition  is  superimposed  on  the  natural  ex- 
changes between  the  atmosphere,  the  biosphere,  and  the  world  ocean. 
Since  the  use  of  energy  has  increased  exponentially  since  the  beginning 


165 


of  industrialization  around  1860,  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  best 
estimate  of  carbon  dioxide  production,  which  results  from  fossil  fuel 
combustion  and  cement  manufacture,  shows  the  same  exponential 
trend  (see  fig.  7). 

The  concentration  of  carbon  dioxide  in  the  atmosphere  has  in- 
creased steadily  from  a  preindustrial  value  of  about  295  parts  per 
million  in  1860  to  a  current  value  of  330  parts  per  million  (+  12 
percent).  Since  the  beginning  of  accurate  and  regular  measurements 
in  1958,  observed  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  concentrations  have  in- 
creased some  5  percent  from  315  parts  per  million  to  the  current  yearly 
average  value  of  330  parts  per  million  as  indicated  in  figure  8. 


Figure  7. — The  annual  world  production  of  carbon  dioxide  from  fossil  fuels  (plus 
a  small  amount  from  cement  manufacture)  is  plotted  since  the  beginning  of 
the  industrial  revolution.  Except  for  brief  interruptions  during  the  two  world 
wars  and  the  Great  Depression,  the  release  of  fossil  carbon  has  increased  at  a 
rate  of  4.3  percent  per  year.  (Data  for  1860-1959  from  C.  D.  Keeling,  "Indus- 
trial Production  of  Carbon  Dioxide  from  Fossil  Fuels  and  Limestone,"  Tellus, 
vol.  25,  1973,  p.  174 ;  data  for  1960-71  from  R.  M.  Rotty,  "Commentary  on  and 
Extension  of  Calculative  Procedure  for  Carbon  Dioxide  Production,"  Tellus, 
vol.  25, 1973,  p.  508.) 

Source  :  Baes.  'C.  F..  et  al.  "The  Global  Carbon  Dioxide  Problem,"  Oak  Ridge  National 
Laboratory,  1976.  (ORNL-5194.) 


166 


Figure  8. — Monthly  average  values  of  the  concentration  of  carbon  dioxide  in  the 
atmosphere  at  Mauna  Loa  Observatory,  Hawaii,  are  plotted  since  the  beginning 
of  accurate  and  regular  measurements  in  1958.  Variations  in  photosynthesis  and 
other  seasonal  effects  produce  the  annual  cycle.  Mean  annual  concentrations 
are  well  above  the  preindustrial  level  (290-300  ppm),  and  the  secular  increase 
is  quite  apparent. 

Source:  Baes,  C.  F.,  et  al.  "The  Global  Carbon  Dioxide  Problem,"  Oak  Ridge  National 
Laboratory,  1978.  (ORNL-5194.) 

The  seasonal  variation  of  the  record  of  carbon  dioxide  measurements 
made  at  Mauna  Lao  is  obvious  and  regular,  showing  an  October  mini- 
mum with  increases  in  the  later  autumn  and  winter  months  and  a  maxi- 
mum in  May.  However,  of  greater  importance  to  possible  climatic 
changes  is  the  continued  year-to-year  rise.  Both  the  seasonal  variation 
and  the  annual  increase  have  been  confirmed  by  measurements  at  other 
locations  around  the  globe. 

Predicting  future  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  levels 

Projecting  the  worldwide  needs  for  energy,  even  with  the  present 
problems,  indicates  a  long-term  global  growth  in  the  consumption  of 
fossil  fuels  and  the  associated  production  of  carbon  dioxide.  Insofar  as 
possible  impact  on  the  climate  is  concerned,  it  is  the  amount  of  carbon 
dioxide  remaining  in  the  atmosphere  that  is  most  important.  In  addi- 
tion to  the  atmosphere,  the  ocean  and  both  land  and  marine  biospheres 
serve  as  reservoirs  for  carbon  dioxide.  Based  on  estimates  of  preindus- 
trial levels  of  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  of  290-295  parts  per  million 
and  the  1958  to  present  Mauna  Loa  data,  between  58  and  64  percent  of 
the  carbon  dioxide  produced  from  burning  fossil  fuels  remains  in  the 
atmosphere.  Cumulative  production  of  carbon  dioxide  is  plotted  in 
figure  9.  The  upper  set  of  points  indicates  the  increase  in  the  carbon 
dioxide  fraction  of  the  atmosphere  that  would  have  occurred  if  all  car- 


167 


bon  dioxide  produced  since  1860  from  fossil  fuels  and  cement  remained 
airborne.  The  lower  set  of  points  represents  the  observed  increase  based 
on  an  assumed  value  of  290-295  parts  per  million  in  1860.  The  differ- 
ence between  the  two  sets  of  points  presumably  indicates  the  amount  of 
carbon  dioxide  being  taken  up  by  the  world  ocean  and  possibly  the 
biosphere  and  placed  in  long-term  storage.  Nearly  half  of  the  carbon 
dioxide  produced  from  fossil  fuels  and  cement  seems  to  have  found  its 
way  into  reservoirs  other  than  the  atmosphere. 


1  r 


n  r 


i  !  1  1  1     i     i  r 


9  S\c9*- 


I860  1870  1880  1890  1900  1910  1920  1930  1940  1950  1960  1970  1980  1990  2000 

YEAR 


Figure  9. — The  cumulative  production  of  carbon  dioxide  since  1860  is  compared 
with  the  observed  increase  in  the  mean  annual  concentration  since  that  time. 
The  similarity  in  the  rates  of  increase  (about  4  percent  per  year)  produces 
strong  evidence  that  these  two  quantities  are  related.  About  50  percent  of  the 
fossil  carbon  flux  apparently  has  been  balanced,  at  least  since  1958,  by  a 
flow  of  carbon  dioxide  to  such  reservoirs  at  the  world  ocean  and/or  the  land 
biota  (assumed  1860  atmospheric  concentration  equals  295  ppm) . 

Source  :  Baes.  C.  F.,  et  al.  "The  Global  Carbon  Dioxide  Problem,"  Oak  Ridge  National 
Laboratory,  1976.  (ORNL-5194.) 

Future  levels  of  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  will  depend  primarily 
on  the  rate  of  consumption  of  fossil  fuel  and  to  a  lesser  extent  on  land 
use  patterns  and  practices.  With  brief  interruptions  for  two  world 
wars  and  the  Great  Depression,  the  production  of  carbon  dioxide  from 
fossil  fuels  has  increased  with  an  annual  rate  of  4.3  percent.33  If  the  use 
of  fossil  fuels  continues  to  grow  at  this  present  rate,  the  total  carbon 
dioxide  injected  into  the  atmosphere  by  man  since  1860  wouM  reach 
300  parts  per  million  by  the  year  2030,  and  the  total  concentration 
would  be  equal  to  595  parts  per  million.  This  assumes,  of  course,  no 
change  in  the  average  uptake  by  other  reservoirs  during  this  time. 
Those  energy  scenarios  that  rely  heavily  on  coal,  especially  for  syn- 
thetic oil  and  gas,  yield  estimated  carbon  dioxide  concentrations  of 


33  4.3  percent  per  year  provides  an  excellent  fit  to  the  data  in  figure  7. 


168 


600  parts  per  million  about  the  year  2015  and  1,400  parts  per  miUion 
about  100  years  from  now.  Rotty  and  Weinberg  (1977)  discuss  a 
scenario  by  Niehaus  in  which  nonfossil  energy  sources  dominate  soon 
after  2000.  Even  in  this  case  the  annual  emission  of  carbon  dioxide 
from  fossil  fuel  peaks  at  about  twice  the  present  level  in  the  year  2000 
and  tapers  off  thereafter;  the  atmospheric  concentration  nevertheless 
reaches  475  parts  per  million  by  2050. 34'  35>  36>  37> 38 

Sources  and  sinks  for  carbon  dioxide 

These  extrapolations  are  based  on  certain  assumptions,  a  critical 
one  being  that  the  ocean  and  the  biosphere  will  continue  to  absorb  a 
large  fraction  of  the  carbon  dioxide  in  the  atmosphere.  Some  ocean- 
ographers  see  increasing  evidence  that  the  upper  mixed  layer  of  the 
ocean,  where  most  of  the  carbon  dioxide  is  stored,  is  rapidly  becoming 
saturated,  and  if  this  were  true,  then  it  tends  to  reenforce  the  attain- 
ment of  relatively. high  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  concentrations  in 
the  next  century.  However,  this  prediction  is  far  from  certain,  because 
carbon  dioxide  absorption  in  the  ocean  could  turn  out  to  be  greater  than 
expected  because  of  mixing  between  ocean  layers  or  other  factors.39 
The  problem  is  further  complicated  by  a  series  of  current  appraisals 
that  suggest  that  the  terrestrial  biomass  appears  to  be  a  net  source  of 
carbon  dioxide  for  the  atmosphere.  George  M.  Woodwell  of  the  Marine 
Biological  Laboratory  at  Woods  Hole,  Mass.,  explains : 

Over  the  past  seven  years  several  reviews  of  the  world  carbon  budget  have  con- 
firmed that  there  is  an  annual  increase  in  the  carbon  dioxide  content  of  [the 
atmosphere]  that  is  worldwide  and  is  almost  certainly  man-caused.  The  source 
of  the  carbon  dioxide  that  is  accumulating  in  the  atmosphere  has  been  commonly 
assumed  to  be  the  combustion  of  fossil  fuels.  Because  the  amount  of  carbon  diox- 
ide accumulating  in  the  atmosphere  is  *  *  *  [about]  half  the  total  released  from 
fossil  fuels,  other  sinks  for  carbon  dioxide  have  been  sought.  The  major  sink  is  the 
ocean,  but  mixing  rates  appear  to  be  too  low  for  the  oceans  to  accommodate  all 
the  carbon  dioxide  that  is  thought  to  be  released  in  excess  of  that  accumulating  in 
the  atmosphere.  The  question  of  whether  the  terrestrial  biota  could  be  another 
sjnk  was  raised  in  1970  [at  SCEP],  and  the  assumption  was  made  that  the  biota 
might  be  a  sink,  especially  in  view  of  the  stimulation  of  photosynthesis  under 
greenhouse  conditions  by  enhanced  concentrations  of  carbon  dioxide.  More  re- 
cently, the  assumption  that  increased  carbon  dioxide  in  air  stimulates  photo- 
synthesis worldwide  has  been  questioned.  So  has  the  assumption  that  the  biota 
is  a  net  global  sink  for  carbon  dioxide.  A  series  of  current  appraisals  suggests 
that,  quite  contrary  to  the  previous  estimates,  the  biota  is  probably  an  addi- 
tional source  of  carbon  dioxide  *  *  *  as  large  as  or  larger  than  the  fossil  fuel 
source.40 

Thus,  the  great  puzzle  is  the  basic  stability  of  the  global  carbon 
budget.  Without  better  information  on  the  behavior  of  the  terrestrial 
biosphere,  it  is  difficult  to  say  whether  the  biosphere  is  a  sink  or  a 
net  source  of  carbon  dioxide.  If  the  biosphere  is  supplying  more  carbon 

34  Baes,  C.  F..  Jr..  et  al.  "The  Global  Cnrbon  Dioxide  Problem,"  Oak  Ridge,  Tenn.,  Oak 
Ridge  National  Laboratory.  1970.  78  pp.  (ORNL  5194. ) 

*  Lenkowski,  Wil.  "Carbon  Dioxide:  A  Problem  of  Producing  Usable  Data."  Chemical 
and  Engineering  News.  vol.  55,  Oct.  17,  1977  :  pp.  26-30. 

;!0  Rotty,  Ralph  M..  "Energy  and  the  Climate."  Institute  for  Enerprv  Analysis,  Oak  Ridge, 
Oak  Ridge  Associated  Universities.  1970.  28  pp.  ( ORAU/IEA (M)  75-3.) 

37  Rottv.  R.  M.  and  A.  M.  Weinberg.  "How  Long  is  Coal's  Future,"  Climatic  Change,  vol.  1, 
No.  1.  March  1977  :  op.  45-57. 

3*  Rottv.  Ralph  M..  "The  Atmospheric  Carbon  Dioxide  Consequences  of  Heavy  Dependence 
on  Coal."  Institute  for  Energy  Analysis,  Oak  Ridge  Associated  Universities,  occasional 
paper.  32  pp..  Nov.  14,  1977. 

39  Anthes.  Ricbard  A..  Hans  A.  Panofskv.  John  J.  Cnbir  and  Albert  Rango,  "The  Atmos- 
phere." Columbus.  Charles  E.  Merrill  Publishing  Co.,  197r>,  p.  204. 

in  YVoo''"  eii  (i.  M..  ef  al.,  "The  Biota  and  the  World  Carbon  Budget."  Science,  vol.  199, 
Jan.  13,  1978.  pp.  141-146. 


169 


dioxide  than  it  is  absorbing,  then  the  behavior  of  the  ocean  must  be 
different  from  what  oceanographers  believe,  in  the  sense  that  it  would 
be  an  even  more  effective  sink  for  carbon  dioxide  than  previously  sur- 
mised. Thus,  there  is  a  need  for  intense  examination  of  the  flux  of 
carbon  into  the  ocean.  The  ability  of  the  world  ocean  to  act  as  a  carbon 
dioxide  sink  is  large,  but  the  rate  of  possible  sequestering  of  carbon  is 
the  important  factor.  One  possibility  is  that  biotic  mechanisms  in  the 
ocean  are  more  effective  than  has  been  assumed  in  transferring  fixed 
carbon  from  the  mixed  (near-surface)  Jayers  of  the  ocean  into  deep 
ocean  waters.  Before  an  estimate  can  be  made  with  confidence  of  what 
fraction  of  the  carbon  dioxide  from  fossil  fuels  remains  in  the  atmos- 
phere, a  better  understanding  of  the  roles  of  both  the  biosphere  and 
the  world  ocean  in  the  carbon  cycle  is  necessary.41, 42- 43 

Atmospheric  effects  of  increased  carbon  dioxide  levels 

A  change  in  the  carbon  dioxide  content  of  the  atmosphere  upsets 
the  Earth's  radiation  balance  by  holding  back  departing  infrared  light. 
All  things  being  equal,  if  no  other  change  were  to  occur  in  the  system, 
the  net  amount  of  energy  accumulated  by  the  Earth  would  raise  its 
surface  temperature  until  the  enhanced  infrared  emission  reestab- 
lished balance  between  incoming  and  outgoing  radiation.  The  problem, 
however,  is  greatly  complicated  by  the  fact  that  other  changes  would 
certainly  take  place.  For  example,  if  the  Earth's  temperature  rises, 
the  water  vapor  content  of  the  atmosphere  is  likely  to  rise.  More  water 
will  have  the  same  effect  as  more  carbon  dioxide  creating  positive  feed- 
back in  the  system  and  hence  forcing  temperatures  to  climb  even  higher. 
A  rise  in  water  vapor  would  quite  likely  increase  the  fraction  of  the 
globe  covered  by  clouds.  Such  an  increase  would  cause  the  amount  of 
primary  solar  radiation  absorbed  by  the  Earth  to  fall.  Some  combina- 
tion of  increased  temperature  and  cloudiness  will  balance  the  enhanced 
absorption  of  infrared  radiation  by  the  added  carbon  dioxide  and 
water  vapor. 

Implications  of  increasing  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  concentrations 
The  possibilities  and  implications  of  a  continued  rise  in  the  atmos- 
pheric carbon  dioxide  concentration  were  reviewed  in  a  special  report 
entitled  ''Energy  and  Climate.*'  released  by  the  National  Kesearch 
Council  (NRC)  on  July  25, 1977.44 

The  most  complete,  though  still  imperfect,  climate  models  suggest 
that  a  doubling  of  the  amount  of  carbon  dioxide  in  the  atmosphere, 
relative  to  its  present  amount,  would  increase  the  average  annual 
temperature  of  the  lower  atmosphere  at  middle  latitudes  by  about  2.4° 
to  2.9°  C  (4.3°  to  5.2°  F),  depending  on  which  model  is  used  to  derive 
the  estimated  temperature  change. 

Based  on  one  climate  model  in  which  the  hydrologic  cycle  is  modeled 
in  detail  along  with  other  aspects  of  climate  behavior,  a  doubling  of 
carbon  dioxide  has  been  calculated  to  result  in  about  a  7  percent  increase 

41Bolin,  Bert.  "Changes  of  Land  Biota  and  Their  Importance  for  the  Carbon  Cycle  ;  The 
Increase  of  Atmospheric  Carbon  Dioxide  Mav  Partlv  Be  Due  to  the  Expansion  of  Forestry 
and  Agriculture."  Science,  vol.  196,  May  6.  1977.  pp.  613-615. 

"2  Siegreuthalpr.  U  and  H.  Oeschsrpr.  "Predicting  Future  Atmospheric  Carbon  Dioxide 
Levels."  Science,  vol.  199,  Jan.  27,  1978,  pp.  388-395. 

43WooriwHl.  Geo-cre  M.,  "The  Carbon  Dioxide  Question,"  Scientific  American,  vol.  238, 
Janvary  1978.  pp.  34-43. 

44  National  Research  Council.  Geophysics  Research  Board,  "Energy  and  Climate,"  Wash- 
ington, National  Academy  of  Sciences,  1977,  281  pp. 


170 


in  global  average  precipitation.  Most  of  this  increase  would  be  con- 
centrated in  higher  latitudes.  A  general  retreat  of  snow  and  sea  ice 
cover,  by  perhaps  as  much  as  10  degrees  of  latitude,  could  result  in 
the  Arctic  regions.  The  extent  of  such  changes  in  the  Antarctic,  how- 
ever, has  not  been  determined.  The  temperature  rise  is  greater  by  a 
factor  of  three  or  four  in  polar  regions  than  the  average  temperature 
change  for  the  world  as  a  whole.  For  each  further  doubling  of  carbon 
dioxide,  an  additional  3°  C  increase  in  air  temperature  is  inferred.  This 
would  mean  that  should  the  carbon  dioxide  concentration  approach 
four  to  eight  times  preindustrial  levels,  and  increase  in  global  mean  air 
temperature  of  more  than  6°  C  (11°  F)  could  be  realized — at  which 
time  Earth  would  be  experiencing  temperatures  warmer  than  those  at 
any  time  in  the  last  million  years.45 

Implications  of  a  climatic  warming 

The  implications  for  man-induced  climatic  warming  are  particularly 
far-reaching  for  agriculture,  according  to  the  NRC  report.  The  global 
picture  presented  by  the  report  is  one  dominated  by  the  f orementioned 
gradual  increase  in  mean  air  temperatures,  with  a  concomitant  shift- 
ing of  agricultural  zones,  altered  rainfall  patterns  and  other  major 
changes.  Worldwide  average  annual  precipitation  could  increase, 
which,  at  first  glance,  would  seem  to  benefit  agriculture.  The  accom- 
panying higher  air  temperature,  however,  would  raise  the  rate  of 
evapotranspiration  from  cultivated  lands,  and  part  of  the  benefits 
from  the  additional  water  supply  could  be  lost.  In  some  regions, 
evapotranspiration  might  exceed  the  increase  in  precipitation;  in 
others,  the  reverse  might  be  true.  At  higher  latitudes,  there  would  be 
a  longer  frostf ree  growing  season  than  at  present,  and  the  boundaries 
of  cultivation  could  be  extended  northward  in  the  Northern  Hemi- 
sphere. Attendantly,  summer  temperatures  might  become  too  high  for 
full  production  of  middle-latitude  crops  such  as  corn  and  soy  beans 
grown  in  Iowa,  Illinois,  Indiana,  and  Missouri,  and  it  might  be 
necessary  to  shift  the  Corn  Belt  toward  the  north  where  less  produc- 
tive soils  are  encountered.  Generally  speaking,  warmer  temperatures 
would  result  in  a  poleward  movement  of  agroclimatic  zones.  As  the 
authors  of  the  NRC  report  state : 

The  most  serious  effects  on  agriculture  would  arise  not  from  changes  in  global 
average  conditions  but  from  shifts  in  the  location  of  climatic  regions  and  changes 
in  the  relationships  of  temperature,  evapotranspiration,  water  supply,  cloudi- 
ness, and  radiation  balance  within  regions.  Present  cropping  patterns,  crop  vari- 
eties, and  farming  technology  in  different  climatic  regions  are  based  on  cumula- 
tive experience  over  many  years  in  the  selection  of  appropriate  crop  species  and 
varieties  for  each  region  and  in  adapting  both  the  plants  and  their  physical 
environment  to  each  other  in  as  nearly  an  optimal  fashion  as  possible.  These 
adaptations  have  remained  fairly  satisfactory  over  the  relatively  nam  nge 
of  climatic  changes  that  have  occurred  in  the  historic  past.  But  large  el  in 
climatic  relationships  within  regions  such  as  might  be  brought  abo  a 
doubling  or  quadrupling  of  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  would  almost  c  _ily 
exceed  the  adaptive  capacity  of  crop  varieties  grown  at  present.46 

The  potential  global  warming  trend  associated  with  increasing  con- 
centrations of  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  could  increase  desertifica- 
tion,47 although  there  is  not  conclusive  evidence  for  this  possibility. 

*Mbid.,  pp.  4,  5. 

47  The  awkward  word  "desertification"  often  refers  to  the  process  by  which  existing  deserts 
spread  but  the  term  also  may  refer  to  the  creation  of  desertlike  conditions  such  as  those 
which  developed  during  the  1930's  dust-bowl  years  in  the  North  American  Great  Plains. 


171 


The  altered  pattern  of  rainfall  and  temperature  resulting  from  the 
release  of  carbon  dioxide  could  change  desert  conditions  in  unexpected 
ways  and  even  increase  agricultural  potential  in  some  cases.  Authors 
of  the  NRC  report  concede  the  present  state  of  ignorance  on  the 
subject : 

The  most  serious  effects  of  possible  future  climatic  changes  could  be  felt  along 
the  boundaries  of  the  arid  and  semiarid  regions  in  both  hemispheres.  We  need  to 
be  able  to  estimate  whether  these  belts  of  aridity  and  semiaridity  will  move 
toward  or  away  from  the  poles  and  whether  they  will  expand  or  contract  in 
area.48 

The  effect  of  manmade  or  of  natural  climatic  alteration  of  desert- 
areas  is  not  clear.  The  advancement  of  desert  conditions  into  agri- 
cultural areas  in  Africa  and  elsewhere  has  been  documented  during 
the  past  decade,  and  although  rainfall  patterns  with  associated  wet 
and  dry  climates  are  controlled  mainly  by  the  general  atmospheric 
circulation,  human  activities  can  have  a  marked  effect  on  local  desert 
conditions,  even  possibly  intensifying  the  process  of  desertification  and 
thereby  compounding  the  problem.  In  particular,  excessive  ploughing 
of  dry  land  or  overenthusiastic  introduction  of  livestock  and  expan- 
sion of  cultivated  areas,  during  wet  periods,  into  marginal  lands  causes 
destruction  of  soil-protecting  vegetation.  During  ensuing  dry  periods, 
these  marginal  lands,  with  their  natural  protective  cover  destroyed  by 
cultivation  and  overgrazing,  suffer  loss  of,  or  a  decline  in,  the  quality 
of  soil.  As  this  occurs  over  a  large  region,  the  bare  dry  ground,  its 
reflectivity  altered,  now  acts  to  intensify  the  natural  climatic  condi- 
tions which  sustain  the  desert.49 

Carbon  dioxide  and  future  climate:  the  real  climate  versus  "model 
climate'''' 

In  the  final  analysis,  it  is  well  to  remember  that  it  cannot  be  asserted 
that  a  doubling  of  carbon  dioxide  in  the  real  world  would  have  the 
same  effects  on  real  climate  as  a  simulated  doubling  of  carbon  dioxide 
in  climate  models  would  have  on  "model  climate."  This  caveat  is  in 
order  because  no  climate  model  is  altogether  realistic  in  its  description 
of  the  real  climatic  system,  and  because  some  of  the  physical  processes 
that  operate  in  the  real  climatic  system  cannot  yet  be  simulated  at  all 
in  climate  models.  Comments  J.  Murray  Mitchell,  Jr. : 

No  climate  model  on  which  the  above  conclusions  [regarding  climatic  warm- 
ing] are  based  is  capable  of  developing  its  own  cloud  systems  in  a  realistic 
way :  most  models  must  be  instructed  before  hand  where  the  clouds  are  assumed 
to  exist,  and  the  clouds  remain  there  unchanged  throughout  the  computer 
experiment  using  the  model.  We  should  be  wary  of  this,  because  if  the  cloudi- 
ness were  to  change  in  the  real  world  along  with  a  carbon  dioxide  change, 
then  the  role  of  clouds  in  affecting  the  temperature  of  the  Earth  might  sig- 
nificantly alter  the  net  temperature  effect  of  the  carbon  dioxide  change  as 
inferred  from  models  that  assume  fixed  cloudiness.50 

the  model  is  allowed  to  adjust  cloudiness  along  with  other  weather 
variables  as  the  calculation  proceeds.  Early  indications  are  that 
Some  preliminary  model  experiments  have  been  attempted  at  the 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration's  (NOAA)  Geo- 
physical Fluid  Dynamics  Laboratory  in  Princeton,  N.J.,  in  which 

48  National  Research  Council,  Geophysics  Research  Board,  op.  cit.,  p.  14. 
48  Ibid. 

50  Mitchell,  J.  Murray,  Jr.,  "Carbon  Dioxide  and  Future  Climate,"  p.  9. 


172 


allowance  for  cloudiness  changes  does  not  greatly  alter  the  results  of 
experiments  using  models  with  fixed  cloudiness. 

Altogether,  the  experience  with  climate  models  suggests  that  their 
use  in  evaluating  the  magnitude  of  temperature  changes  associated 
with  changes  of  atmospheric  carbon  dioxide  leads  to  results  that  are 
likely  to  approximate  reality  fairly  closely.  Models  may  be  overesti- 
mating the  temperature  and  other  climatic  effects  of  carbon  dioxide 
changes  by  as  much  as  a  factor  of  two.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
equally  likely  that  they  may  be  underestimating  the  effects  by  a 
factor  of  two.  In  balance,  the  model  results  to  date  warrant  being 
taken  as  an  unprejudiced  and  credibly  realistic  approximation  to 
reality.51 

OZONE  DEPLETION 

The  concern  that  man's  activities  could  in  some  fashion  change  the 
stratosphere  first  emerged  as  a  public  issue  during  the  debate  on  the 
American  SST  in  1969.  The  American  SST  program  was,  at  that 
time,  almost  a  decade  old  and  was  approaching  its  final  phase  when 
it  was  challenged  by  a  coalition  of  more  than  30  environmentally 
oriented  organizations.  The  environmentalists  contended  that  the 
SST,  flying  in  the  stratosphere,  would  contaminate  the  stratosphere 
and  alter  its  characteristics.  The  dominant  concern  was  that  water, 
created  as  a  product  of  fuel  combustion,  would  interact  with  the 
stratospheric  ozone  and  destroy  it. 

Concerns  regarding  ozone  destruction 

Ozone  (03)  exists  everywhere  in  the  atmosphere  and  reaches  a 
maximum  concentration  at  around  80,000  feet.  It  is  created,  as  well 
as  destroyed,  by  the  interaction  of  ultraviolet  light  from  the  Sun  with 
oxygen  molecules  in  the  upper  atmosphere.  Most  of  the  ozone  is 
created  in  the  Tropics  and  is  dispersed  from  there  toward  both  poles. 
Due  to  the  destructive  action  of  sunlight  and  to  the  atmospheric 
transport  systems,  the  Tropics,  where  most  of  the  ozone  is  made,  have 
the  least  dense  coverage  of  ozone.  Ozone  density  increases  in  the 
temperate  zones  and  reaches  its  maximum  density  in  the  polar  regions. 
Ozone  density  over  a  given  spot  on  Earth  may  vary  as  much  as  25 
to  30  percent  on  a  given  day  and  as  much  as  300  percent  throughout 
the  year  depending  on  the  season.  Ozone  density  measurements  have 
shown  that  the  Northern  Hemisphere  of  the  Earth  has  a  slightly 
denser  coverage  than  the  Southern  Hemisphere. 

The  importance  of  the  ozone  content  of  the  upper  atmosphere 
centers  on  the  fact  that  the  ultraviolet  light  that  creates  ozone  is 
absorbed  in  the  process.  These  wavelengths  of  ultraviolet  light  are 
damaging  to  life  of  all  sorts  if  the  intensity  is  too  great.  It  should  be 
noted  that  some  ultraviolet  light  is  required  by  animal  life  to  produce 
vitamin  D  which  gives  protection  against  rickets. 

In  the  debate  over  the  American  SST,  it  became  clear  that  neither 
side  had  enough  data  on  the  stratosphere  to  refute  the  other.  Despite 
this,  the  debate  remained  lively  for  more  than  a  year  and  was  finally 
terminated  by  the  congressional  decision  to  cancel  the  SST  program 
and  to  initiate  programs  to  study  the  upper  atmosphere  and  in  par- 
ticular, its  ozone. 

51  Information  gleaned  In  a  session  on  "climatic  futures"  at  the  1978  annual  meeting  of 
the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science  in  Washington,  D.C.,  Feb.  17, 
1978. 


173 


Congress  requested  and  funded  a  3-year,  $24  million  program,  to 
determine  whether  or  not  the  stratospheric  flight  constituted  a  threat 
to  the  Earth's  environment.  Responsibility  for  the  study  was  given  to 
the  Department  of  Transportation  and  was  called  the  "Climatic  Im- 
pact Assessment  Program"  (CIAP).52  The  theoretical  mechanisms 
which  indicated  that  water,  created  from  the  combustion  of  fuel,  would 
mix  with  and  destroy  ozone  appeared  to  be  reasonable  and  meritorious 
of  serious  study.  Early  in  the  CIAP,  however,  actual  measurements  of 
ozone  density  in  the  stratosphere  in  volumes  of  air  which  were  per- 
meated by  the  plume  from  jet  engines,  were  made.  These  measurements 
showed  that  ozone  density  seemed  to  increase  subsequent  to  the  injec- 
tion of  water  vapor.  Why  this  occurs  is  not  yet  understood,  but  the  test 
provided  adequate  information  to  conclude  that  water  vapor  injected 
into  the  stratosphere  would  not  constitute  a  danger  to  the  ozone. 

During  the  conduct  of  the  CIAP  program,  other  papers  began  to 
appear  which  described  a  variety  of  heretofore  unconsidered  theoreti- 
cal ways  in  which  man's  activities  could  adversely  effect  the  ozone 
density  in  the  stratosphere.  The  atmosphere  of  the  Earth  is  about  80 
percent  nitrogen  and  20  percent  oxygen.  The  oxygen  used  in  the  com- 
bustion process  is  therefore  accompanied  by  a  large  amount  of  nitro- 
gen. The  heat  of  combustion  causes  the  formation  of  several  oxides  of 
nitrogen  (NOx).  Theoretical  mechanisms  were  proposed  which  pre- 
dicted that  the  NOx  formed  in  the  stratosphere  by  a  jet  engine  would 
mix  with  the  ozone  and  destroy  it  in  a  catalytic  manner.  In  other 
words,  during  the  process  in  which  the  NOx  would  destroy  the  ozone, 
the  XOx  would  be  reformed  and  released  to  destroy  still  more  ozone 
in  a  continuous  manner.53  The  mechanisms  for  this  process  appeared 
reasonable  and  worthy  of  serious  study.  However,  Dr.  John  J. 
McKetta  of  the  CEQ  noted  that  the  total  NOx  burden  produced  by 
combustion  processes  amounts  to  only  about  2  percent  of  that  produced 
by  dying  vegetation  in  the  natural  cycle  of  plant  life.54  It  was  then 
noted  that  the  artificial  insertion  of  nitrogen  compounds  into  the  soil 
for  purposes  of  fertilizing  caused  the  evolution  and  ultimate  release 
of  XOx  in  quantities  amounting  to  a  sizable  fraction  of  that  produced 
by  nature. 55 • 56 

Moreover  the  bromine  compounds  used  in  agriculture  as  antifungi- 
cides  were  held  to  be  even  more  potent  in  destroying  ozone  than  NOx.57 
Still  more  very  large  sources  of  NOx  were  identified,  such  as  lightning 
from  the  some  5.000  storms  around  the  Earth,  each  day.  Also,  air 
bursts  of  nuclear  bombs  produce  NOx  at  the  rate  of  10,000  tons  per 
megaton  of  yield.  58, 59  In  the  early  1960?s,  340  megatons  of  explosive 
injected  about  3%  million  tons  of  XOx  into  the  stratosphere. 

52  "Climatic  Impact  Assessment  Program  Development  and  Accomplishments,  1971-75," 
J.  Mormino,  et  al.,  D0T-TST-76-41,  December  1975. 

53  "Reduction  of  Stratospheric  Ozone  by  Nitrogen  Oxide  Catalysts  from  Supersonic  Trans- 
port Exhaust,"  H.  Johnston,  Science,  Aug.  6,  1971. 

54  "The  Eight  Surprises,"  J.  J.  McKetta.  address  to  the  American  Trucking  Association, 
Oct.  16.  1974.  reprinted  in  the  Congressional  Record.  Mar.  12,  1975. 

55  "NOAA  Scientist  Weighs  Possible  Fertilizer  Effects  on  Ozone,"  Paul  Crutzen,  Depart* 
ment  of  Commerce  News,  Apr.  15,  1975. 

56  "Nitrogen  Fertilizer  Threatens  Ozone,"  quotes  from  J.  McElroy,  Washington  Star, 
Dec.  12.  1974. 

57  "Weather  Warfare"  (Bromine).  New  Scientist,  Mar.  27,  1975,  p.  762. 

58  "Ozone  Appears  Unalterpd  by  Nitric  Oxide,"  Kenneth  J.  Stein,  Aviation  Week  and  Space 
Technology,  Nov.  6,  1972.  p.  28.  •  •  .    ^        ,r  , 

.  59  "Nitrogen  Oxides,  Nuclear  Weapon  Testing,  Concorde  and  Stratospheric  Ozone,"  P. 
Goldsmith,  et  at,  Nature,  Aug.  31,  1973,  p.  545. 


34-857—79  14 


174 


It  had  begun  to  appear  to  many  that,  in  the  Earth's  atmosphere, 
which'  is  about  80  percent  nitrogen  and  20  percent  oxygen,  the  NOx  is 
ubiquitous  and  that  there  was  just  no  legislative  way  to  save  the  ozone 
from  the  catalytic  disintegration  hypothesized.  The  issue  endures 
largely  as  an  academic  debate,  though  its  character  could  change  again. 
One  group  holds  that  the  destructive  mechanisms  ascribed  to  NOx  are 
real  and  that  ozone  density  is  controlled  by  the  presence  of  NOx-  An 
opposing  group  contends  that,  while  the  hypothetical  reactions  appear 
to  be  sound,  they  just  don't  seem  to  occur.  The  insertion  of  3%  million 
tons  of  XOx  by  nuclear  explosions  over  1  year's  time,  for  example,  was 
judged  by  many  as  an  experiment  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  cause  un- 
mistakable perturbations  in  ozone  density,  and  would  prove  or  dis- 
prove the  destruction  hypothesis.  Recordings  of  ozone  density  before, 
during,  and  following  the  test  were  analyzed  by  numerous  people.  One 
investigator  detected  trends  which  he  associated  with  the  explosions ; 
however,  others  held  that  "the  conclusion  that  massive  injections  of 
nitrogen  oxides  into  the  stratosphere  do  not  upset  the  ozone  layer  seems 
inescapable."  60 

Putting  that  aside,  yet  another  challenge  to  the  ozone,  the  manmade 
fluorocarbons  (freon  aerosol  propellants  and  refrigerants)  has  been 
postulated.61  The  hypothetical  mechanisms  by  which  these  compounds 
would  migrate  into  the  stratosphere,  break  down  to  release  odd  chlorine 
molecules  which  would  in  turn  set  up  a  catalytic  destruction  of  ozone, 
where  examined  and  found  to  be  plausible  and  a  cause  for  concern.  Sub- 
sequent measurements  taken  in  the  stratosphere  proved  the  presence  of 
numerous  odd  chlorine  molecules,  some  of  which  could  indeed  be  shown 
to  have  their  origin  in  freon.62 

Although  the  empirical  validity  of  the  destructive  interaction  of 
these  odd  chlorines  with  ozone  is  difficult  to  show  and  has  yet  to  be 
shown,  their  discovery  in  the  stratosphere  was  enough  for  several 
scientists  to  call  for  a  ban  on  the  fluorocarbons.  Other  scientists,  as  well 
as  industry,  took  an  opposing  view,  calling  for  empirical  proof  prior  to 
taking  actions  to  ban  or  control  the  manufacture  or  use  of  freon 
propellants. 

The  argument  became  partly  one  of  timing  with  one  side  claiming 
that  no  emergency  could  be  proven  and  plenty  of  time  was  available  to 
test  the  destruction  hypothesis.  Opposing  this  was  the  view  that  it  may 
very  well  be  too  late  already  since  most  of  the  freons  already  released 
have  yet  to  reach  the  stratosphere. 

Unlike  the  case  with  XOx.  where  changes  as  vast  as  banning  the 
use  of  nitrating  fertilizers  might  be  required,  the  control  of  freon 
release  was  a  manageable  target  for  a  regulatory  control.  The  resulting 
studies  and  actions  represent  a  model  of  rapid  and  cooperative  action 
between  a  large  number  of  highly  diverse  Government  offices  and 
agencies.  The  decision  was  made  to  act  without  waiting  for  empiricial 
proof  of  the  destruction  hypothesis,  but  not  to  institute  the  total  and 
immediate  ban  some  investigators  called  for.  Instead,  propellant  ap- 
plication would  be  labeled  as  possibly  hazardous  to  the  ozone  and  then 

"°  I '»id. 

r;  "Stratospheric  O^one  Destruction  hv  Man-made  Ohlorofluoromethanes,"  R.  J.  Cicerone, 
et  al..  Science,  Sept.  27,  1974. 

""Atmospheric  Halocarbons  and  Stratospheric  Ozone,"  J.  E.  Lovelock,  Nature,  Nov.  22, 
1074. 


175 


i banned  in  stages.  Refrigerants  would  be  studied  pending  their  possible 
regulation  at  some  future  time. 

Action  by  the  Government  on  the  regulation  of  fluorocarbons 

The  Council  on  Environmental  Quality  (CEQ)  and  the  Federal 
Council  for  Science  and  Technology  (FCST)  reviewed  theoretical 
oapers  on  the  destructive  interaction  between  fluorocarbons  and  ozone, 
the  first  of  which  appeared  in  1974.  They  decided  that  the  case  was 
worthy  of  serious  concern.  In  January  1975,  the  CEQ  and  FCST 
jointly  created  a  large  ad  hoc  task  force  known  as  the  Federal  Inter- 
agency Task  Force  on  Inadvertent  Modification  of  the  Stratosphere 
(IMOS).  IMOS  membership  included  representatives  from: 

Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS). 

Department  of  Agriculture. 

Department  of  Commerce, 

Department  of  Defense. 

National  Institute  of  Environmental  Health  Sciences. 

Food  and  Drug  Administration. 

Department  of  Justice. 

Department  of  State. 

Department  of  Transportation. 

Energy  Research  and  Development  Administration. 

Environmental  Protection  Agency. 

Consumer  Products  Safety  Commission. 

National  Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration. 

National  Science  Foundation. 

Council  on  Environmental  Quality. 

Office  of  Management  and  Budget  (observer  only) . 

The  work  of  IMOS  was  swift  and  orderly.  A  series  of  studies  was 
completed  and  published  in  their  report  by  June  1975.63  IMOS  con- 
cluded "that  fluorocarbons  released  to  the  environment  are  a  legitimate 
cause  for  concern."  The  report  also  referred  to  a  similar  study  which 
was  then  underway  at  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  IMOS  rec- 
ommended that,  should  the  results  of  the  NAS  study  agree  with  their 
results,  then  Federal  regulatory  agencies  should  initiate  rulemaking 
procedures  for  implementing  regulations  to  restrict  fluorocarbon  uses. 

The  data  base  for  the  NAS  study  was  of  course  the  same  data  base 
used  by  IMOS  since  it  was  the  only  one  available.  The  conclusions 
reached  by  both  studies  were  therefore  the  same,  and  rulemaking  was 
instituted. 

If  the  data  base  could  have  contained  some  empirical  proof  sup- 
porting the  validity  of  the  massive  ozone  destruction  hypothesis,  the 
rulemaking  procedures  would  have  proceeded  without,  or  at  least  with 
much  less  debate  and  protest.  As  it  was,  the  rules  were  handed  down 
without  proof,  the  justification  being  that  the  consequences  of  higher 
UV  exposure  due  to  ozone  thinning  were  sufficiently  severe  that  pre- 
cautionary regulations  were  necessary.  Under  these  circumstances,  the 
rules  Ave  re  models  of  compromise.  A  ban  was  to  be  issued  over  the  pro- 
test of  industry,  but  it  would  neither  be  the  complete  ban  nor  the  imme- 
diate one  demanded  by  the  environmental  groups  and  some  scientists. 


63  '"Fluorocarbons  and  the  Environment,"  IMOS.  Council  on  Environmental  Quality  and 
the  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  June  1975. 


176 


The  proposed  rules  were  formulated  jointly  by  the  Department  of 
Health,  Education,  and  Welfare,  the  Environmental  Protection 
Agency,  and  the  Consumer  Product  Safety  Commission.  In  brief,  they 

state : 

1.  By  October  15,  1978,  no  company  may  manufacture  fluoro- 
carbons  for  use  in  aerosol  products. 

2.  By  December  15, 1978,  companies  must  stop  using  fluorocar- 
bons  as  propellants  in  aerosol  products. 

3.  As  of  April  15,  1979,  no  spray  product  containing  a  fluoro- 
carbon  propellant  may  be  introduced  into  interstate  commerce. 
Products  on  store  shelves  at  that  time  may  be  sold,  however,  and 
there  will  be  no  recall. 

4.  Beginning  in  October  1978,  warning  labels  will  be  put  on 
aerosol  products  which  contain  fluorocarbons  to  warn  the  user 
that  the  fluorocarbons  are  present  and  may  affect  the  ozone. 

5.  Certain  aerosol  products  intended  for  medical  purposes  are 
exempt  from  these  regulations. 

The  rule  on  labeling  has  already  been  put  into  effect.64 

Climatic  effects  of  ozone  depletion 

While  the  effect  of  a  significant  buildup  in  the  concentration  of 
chlorofluorocarbons  and  chlorocarbons  on  the  chemical  balance  of  the 
Earth/atmosphere  system  is  currently  a  subject  of  concern,  their  im- 
pact and  effect  on  the  Earth's  overall  thermal  energy  balance  must 
also  be  considered.  The  chlorofluorocarbons  and  chlorocarbons  have 
strong  infrared  absorption  bands,  thus  allowing  these  compounds  to 
trap  long-wave  radiation  emitted  by  the  Earth  and,  in  turn,  enhance 
the  atmospheric  "greenhouse  effect."  This  enhancement  may  lead  to 
an  appreciable  increase  in  global  surface  and  atmospheric  temperature 
if  atmospheric  concentrations  of  these  compounds  reach  values  of  the 
order  of  2  parts  per  billion  (ppb)  ,65 

Furthermore,  ozone  itself  is  important  to  the  Earth's  climate  because 
it  absorbs  some  quantities  of  both  solar  and  terrestrial  infrared  radia- 
tion, thereby  affecting  the  enerofv  balance  of  the  Earth/atmosphere 
system  that  determines  the  Earth's  temperature.  Exactly  how  changes 
in  the  ozone  concentration  might  affect  climate  are  far  more  difficult 
to  determine,  since  changes  in  surface  temperature  from  variations  in 
ozone  depend  on  such  diverse  factors  as  whether  the  total  amount  of 
ozone  is  increased  or  decreased,  whether  the  height  at  which  the  maxi- 
mum amount  of  ozone  occurs  is  altered,  or  whether  the  latitudinal 
distribution  of  ozone  is  disturbed.  James  Coakley  of  the  National  Cen- 
ter for  Atmospheric  Research  (NCAR),  Boulder,  Colo.,  has  found 
that  a  uniform  reduction  in  the  total  amount  of  atmospheric  ozone 
would  lead  to  a  cooling  of  the  Earth's  surface,  but  that  a  decrease  in 
altitude  in  the  stratosphere  where  ozone  has  its  maximum  concentra- 
tion can  warm  the  surface.  Similarly,  an  increase  in  total  amount  of 
ozouo  warms,  but  an  increase  in  the  altitude  of  maximum  ozone  con- 
centration can  cool  the  climate.  If  it  were  known  that  an  atmospheric 

«  The  previous  section  on  the  ozone  depletion  Issue  was  contributed  by  George  Chatham, 
Spprinllst  In  Aeronautics  and  Space,  Science  Policy  Research  Division,  Congressional  Re- 
peareh  Service. 

* Rnmanathan.  V.,  "Greenhousp  Effect  Due  to  Chlorofluorocarbons:  Climatic  Implica- 
tions" Science,  vol.  190,  Oct.  3,  1975,  pp.  50,  51. 


177 


pollutant,  such  as  chlorofluorocarbons,  acted  to  reduce  the  amount  of 
ozone  in  the  atmosphere,  then  before  one  could  conclude  that  this  would 
lead  to  a  global  cooling,  it  would  still  also  have  to  be  known  if  the 
clilorofluorocarbons  moved  the  altitude  of  maximum  ozone  concen- 
tration up  or  down.  If  the  maximum  moved  up,  this  would  enhance 
the  cooling  effect  of  a  decrease  in  ozone,  but  if  the  maximum  moved 
down,  that  situation  would  oppose  the  cooling  attributable  to  the 
decrease  in  total  ozone.  Thus,  while  it  is  conceivable  that  a  large  change 
in  ozone  could  significantly  affect  climate,  it  may  be  seen  that  the 
direction  of  any  potential  ozone-climatic  effect  is  difficult  to  deter- 
mine.66 

WASTE  HEAT 

Another  man-generated  pollutant  that  could  affect  the  climate  is 
waste  heat  generated  by  combustion,  automobiles,  home  heating,  in- 
dustrial processes,  and  power  generation — all  produce  heat  that  even- 
tually is  emitted  into  the  atmosphere.  In  addition  to  its  direct  effect 
on  atmospheric  temperature,  in  specific  situations  waste  heat  can  en- 
hance convection,  the  vertical  motion  so  important  in  precipitation 
processes. 

On  a  regional  scale,  thermal  effects  may  become  important  by  the 
turn  of  the  century.  However,  on  a  global  scale,  climatic  effects  of 
thermal  pollution  today  and  for  the  near  future  appear  to  be  insig- 
nificant. Some  scientists,  however,  believe  this  impact  may  grow  with 
increased  energy  production  and  conversion.  Research  meteorologist 
James  T.  Peterson  of  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency  states 
that  a  long-term  view  reveals  that  continued  growth  of  energy  use 
could  lead  to  a  large-scale  climatic  change  in  100  years  or  more.  Of 
particular  concern,  says  Peterson,  are  present-day  nuclear  power- 
plants,  which  will  produce  about  55  percent  more  waste  heat  than  a 
fossil  fuel  plant  for  a  given  amount  of  electricity  generated.67 

To  better  understand  the  effects  of  heat  releases  on  weather  and 
climate,  the  U.S.  Department  of  Energy  is  sponsoring  a  program  called 
METER,  which  stands  for  "meteorological  effects  of  thermal  energy 
releases."  METER  program  scientists  are  collecting  data  from  several 
powerplant  sites  around  the  United  States  to  aid  in  predicting  the 
specific  environmental  effects  of  releasing  large  amounts  of  excess  heat 
and  moisture  directly  into  the  atmosphere  from  powerplant  operations 
and  cooling  towers.  The  amounts  of  heat  and  moisture  emitted  from 
the  stacks  and  towers  of  a  large  powerplant  are  small  compared  with 
those  released  by  even  a  moderate-sized  thunderstorm.  Cooling  tower 
plumes  are  suspected  of  acting  as  a  triggering  mechanism  to  create 
instabilities  in  the  atmosphere,  initiating  or  otherwise  modifying 
rainfall  and  disrupting  storm  patterns.  A  typical  cooling  tower  will 
produce  5,000  megawatts  of  heat  and  evaporate  40,000  to  60,000 
gallons  of  water  per  minute.  Even  so,  a  modest  thunderstorm  will  put 
out  800  times  that  much  water  and  30  times  that  much  heat.68 

The  urban  "heat  island" 

•  On  a  local  scale,  the  climatic  effects  of  energy  use  and  heat  produc- 
tion are  significant  and  well  documented.  Obviously,  urban  areas  are 

66  Schneider.  Stephen  H.,  "The  Genesis  Strategy:  Climate  and  Global  Survival."  New 
York.  Plenum  Press,  1976.  p.  183. 

67  Peterson,  James  T.,  "Energy  and  the  Weather,"  Environment,  vol.  15,  October  1973, 
PP.  4,  5,  8. 

88  "Power  Plant  May  Alter  Weather,"  the  Christian  Science  Monitor,  Mar.  13,  1978,  p.  19. 


178 


experiencing  thermal  effects.  The  most  evident  feature  of  city  climate 
is  its  excess  warmth,  which  is  commonly  referred  to  as  the  urban  heat 
island.  Cities  are  prodigious  sources  of  heat.  Factory  smokestacks,  air- 
conditioners  and  heating  systems  of  offices  and  homes,  vehicle  engines 
and  exhausts — all  contribute  waste  heat  to  the  outside  atmosphere', 
particularly  in  winter.  Summer  temperatures  in  the  city  are  0.6°  C  to 
1.1°  C  higher  than  in  nearby  rural  areas,  and  1.1°  C  to  2.2°  C  higher  in 
winter.  Also,  the  building  materials  of  brick,  asphalt,  mortar,  and 
concrete  readily  absorb  and  store  more  heat  from  the  Sun  than  the  soil 
and  vegetation  of  a  rural  area,  and  give  it  up  more  slowly  after  sun- 
down. While  rural  areas  are  rapidly  cooling  after  sunset,  the  building 
materials  gradually  release  their  stored  heat  to  the  urban  atmosphere, 
tending  to  keep  it  warmer  than  the  countryside. 

Another  factor  that  retains  high  temperatures  and  makes  the  atmos- 
phere dry  is  the  way  a  city  disposes  of  its  rainwater  or  snow.  During 
any  shower  or  storm,  the  water  is  quickly  drained  from  the  roofs  by 
gutters  and  drainpipes,  and  from  the  sidewalks  and  streets  by  gutters 
and  storm  sewers.  The  winter  snows  are  removed  as  quickly  as  possible 
by  shovels  and  plows,  and  often  hauled  away  in  trucks.  These  methods 
of  removing  precipitation  not  only  take  away  sources  of  moisture  but 
also  remove  the  cooling  effect  of  evaporation.  In  the  country,  evapora- 
tion can  cool  the  area  where  the  rain  and  melting  snow  stay  on  the 
surface  or  seep  into  the  ground.  A  large  fraction  of  the  absorbed  heat 
energy  is  used  in  evapotranspiration  as  vegetation  transpires  water 
vapor. 

An  advantage  of  urban  heat  emissions  is  that  the}7  decrease  the 
likelihood  of  surface-based  air  temperature  inversions  (air  tempera- 
ture increases  rather  than  decreases  with  height)  and  increase  the 
height  of  the  mixed  layer  near  the  surface.  Inversions  inhibit  turbu- 
lent air  motions  which  diffuse  and  dilute  pollutants.  Heat  emissions  at 
the  city  surface  create  a  relative  decrease  in  temperature  with  height 
which  in  turn  aids  the  mixing  and  dispersion  of  pollutants.  Observa- 
tions of  urban  and  rural  temperature-height  profiles  have  shown  this 
effect  of  thermal  emissions.  Thus,  urban  pollutants  emitted  near 
ground  level,  such  as  carbon  monoxide  from  auto  exhaust,  will  be 
diffused  through  a  greater  volume  of  the  atmosphere  with  a  consequent 
reduction  in  concentration. 

Other  major  features  of  urban  climates  that  are  related  to  thermal 
pollution  include : 

A  longer  frost-free  growing  season. 

Less  snowfall  because  snow  melts  while  falling  through  the 
warmer  urban  atmosphere  and  less  snow  accumulation  because 
-now  melts  on  contact  with  warmer  urban  surfaces. 

Lower  relative  humidity. 

Decreased  occurrence  and  density  of  fog  because  of  the  lower 
relative  humidity,  a  feature  which  may  be  offset  by  more  par- 
t  Iculate  matter  which  serves  as  condensation  nuclei. 

A  slight  component  of  the  wind  direction  toward  the  city  cen- 
ter as  a  result  of  the  horizontal  temperature  contrast. 

Apparent  enhancement  of  precipitation  downwind  of  cities,  a 
phenomenon  partially  due  to  increased  convection  (vertical 
motion). 


179 


ALBEDO 

The  calbedo  is  a  numerical  indication  of  the  percentage  of  incoming 
i>lar  radiation  that  is  reflected  by  the  land,  ocean,  and  atmosphere  back 
into  space  and,  attendantly,  how  much  is  absorbed  by  the  climatic  sys- 
tem. Another  important  manner  for  altering  the  Earth's  heat  budget, 
albedo  can  be  changed  by  the  process  of  urbanization,  agricultural 
activities,  changes  in  the  character  of  the  land  surface,  and  by  in- 
creasing or  decreasing  cloudiness.69 

Most  clouds  are  both  excellent  absorbers  of  infrared  radiation  and 
rellectors  of  solar  radiation.  Therefore,  clouds  are  a  major  factor  in 
determining  the  Earth's  energy  balance.  An  increase  in  clouds  could 
warm  surface  temperatures  by  tending  to  reduce  the  flux  of  long- wave 
(that  is,  infrared)  radiation  to  space,  or  cool  surface  temperatures  by 
reflecting  incoming  solar  radiation  back  to  space.  The  net  effect  of 
increased  cloudiness  is  to  either  warm  or  cool  the  surface,  depending 
on  cloud  type,  latitude,  and  season.70  The  effect  of  cloud  condensation 
nuclei  (CCN)  on  the  formation  of  fog  and  clouds  could  alter  the  albedo 
of  a  region  if  the  fog  or  clouds  were  sufficiently  persistent  or  extensive, 
P.  V.  Hobbs  and  H.  Harrison,  both  professors  of  atmospheric  science 
at  the  University  of  Washington,  and  E.  Eobinson  of  Washington 
State  Universit3T?s  Air  Pollution  Research  Unit,  contend  that  perhaps 
the  most  sensitive  atmospheric  processes  which  can  be  affected  by  air 
pollutants  are  those  involved  in  the  development  of  clouds  and  pre- 
cipitation. 

Apart  from  effects  on  precipitation  processes,  inadvertent  modifi- 
cation of  the  microstrncture  and  distribution  of  clouds,  with  attend- 
ant consequences  for  radiative  properties,  could  have  profound  effects 
on  atmospheric  temperature  distributions  and  global  climate.71 
Whether  a  variation  in  terrain  on  temperature  or  other  factors  would 
have  a  negative  or  positive  feedback  interaction  with  clouds  is  a 
major  question  in  climate  theory  that  will  be  answered  by  extensive 
analyses  of  observations  and  model  studies. 

The  high  reflectivity  of  snow  and  ice,  as  compared  with  water  or 
land  surfaces,  provides  positive  feedback  if  the  average  year-round 
temperature  decreases  and  the  extent  of  ice  and  snow  coverage  in- 
creases and  reflects  more  of  the  incoming  sunlight  back  to  space.  The 
result  is  to  lower  the  rate  of  heating  still  more,  particularly  in  the 
regions  closest  to  the  poles.  Columbia  University  scientists  observed 
from  a  study  of  satellite  photomaps  that  snow  and  icepack  cover 
were  more  extensive  and  of  longer  duration  in  the  early  1970's  than 
in  previous  years.  The  result,  they  reported,  was  to  increase  the 
Earth's  albedo,  reflect  more  sunlight  back  into  space,  and  change  the 
planet's  heat  balance.72  It  was  pointed  out  that  normally  vegetated 
ground  reflects  about  15  percent  to  20  percent  of  sunlight  and  a  calm 
ocean  reflects  5  percent  to  10  percent,  while  snow-covered  grassland 
or  pack  ice  reflects  about  80  percent. 

88  Otterman.  J.,  "Anthropogenic  Impact  on  the  Albedo  of  the  Earth,"  Climatic  Change, 
vol.  1,  Xo.  2,  1977,  pp.  137-155. 

70  "Living  With  Climatic  Change,"  proceedings  of  a  conference/workshop  held  in  Toronto, 
Not.  17-22,  1975  ;  Ottawa,  Science  Council  of  Canada,  1976,  p.  88. 

71  Hobbs,  P.  V.,  H.  Harrison,  and  E.  Robinson,  "Atmospheric  Effects  of  Pollutants,"  pp. 
910,  911. 

72  The  atmosphere  is  principally  heated  by  terrestrial  reradiation,  thus  the  reflected 
incoming  light,  escaping  back  into  space  instead  of  being  transformed  into  heat,  represents 
a  deficit  in  the  Earth's  energy  balance. 


180 


They  also  found  that  snow  and  ice  covered  twice  as  much  ground 
in  October  1972  as  in  October  1968  and  correlated  that  situation  with 
a  drop  in  global  air  temperatures.  They  warned  that  the  potential 
for  fast  changes  of  climate  evidently  does  exist  and  should  be  kepfe 
in  mind.73 

There's  yet  another  contributor  to  the  planet's  albedo :  airborne  par- 
ticles, particularly  the  extremely  fine  dust  particles  that  have  been 
carried  too  high  in  the  atmosphere  to  be  scavenged  and  washed  out 
by  precipitation  processes.  Many  of  these  particles  remain  aloft  for 
months  or  years.  Dust  of  various  kinds  may  initiate  short-term  cool- 
ing trends  with  characteristic  time  spans  of  decades  or  centuries.  This 
depends  on  the  optical  properties  of  the  particles,  which  in  turn  de- 
pend on  particle  composition  and  size  distribution.  Furthermore,  par- 
ticles radiate  in  the  infrared,  and  therefore  can  alter  the  outgoing 
long-wave  radiation. 

Densely  populated  regions  tend  to  have  higher  albedos  than  do 
forests  or  cultivated  soils.  The  deserts  of  the  world  have  a  highei 
albedo  than,  for  example,  grass-covered  fields.  Urbanization,  agricul- 
ture, transportation  networks — all  act  to  alter  the  surface  albedo. 
While  local  changes  in  albedo  have  been  determined,  however,  the 
overall  integrated  global  variation  is  still  unknown.  Even  local  net 
effects  of  surface  changes  may  not  be  fully  understood,  since  changes 
in  the  nature  of  a  surface  are  generally  accompanied  by  change  in 
surface  roughness.  Surface  roughness  alterations  can  affect  the  man- 
ner and  rate  of  heat  and  momentum  exchanges  with  the  atmosphere 
through  modification  of  small-scale  turbulent  processes.74 

A  factor  such  as  roughness  of  the  ocean  should  not  be  overlooked 
in  ocean/atmosphere  exchange  mechanisms.  Ocean  surface  pollution 
may  also  figure  in  the  alteration  of  the  albedo  as  well  as  the  sea  surface 
characteristics:  an  oil  slick  forming  a  surface  film  on  the  sea.  for 
example. 

LARGE-SCALE  IRRIGATION" 

Beginning  in  the  1940's,  large  areas  of  the  Texas  Panhandle,  western 
Oklahoma,  Kansas,  and  Nebraska  came  under  widespread  irrigation. 
This  large-scale  irrigation  adds  more  moisture  to  the  air  through 
evaporation;  has  made  large  land  surfaces  greener  (which  changes 
the  albedo) ;  and  may  act  to  decrease  dust  in  the  air.  Since  the  situation 
is  somewhat  analogous  to  a  large-area  rain  modification  project,  a 
number  of  studies  have  been  conducted  to  ascertain  if  greater  rainfall 
could  occur  in  the  vicinity  or  downwind  of  irrigated  areas. 

Schickedanz  (1976)  provided  strong  evidence  of  irrigation-related 
anomalies;  specifically,  increased  rainfall  during  months  when  irri- 
gation took  place  in  and/or  surrounding  large  irrigated  areas  of  the 
Groat  Plains. 

The  percent  rain  increase  associated  with  the  irrigation  effect  was 
found  to  vary  from  14  percent  to  26  percent  in  June,  57  percent  to 
91  percent  in  July,  15  percent  to  26  percent  in  August,  and  19  percent 

73  Kukla,  George  .T.,  and  Helena  J.  Kukla,  "Increased  Surface  Albedo  in  the  Northern 
Hemisphere,"  Science,  vol.  183,  Feb.  22,  1974,  pp.  709,  713,  714. 

A  growing  fraction  of  current  evidence  seems  to  suggest,  however,  that  this  has  not  been 
the  in  North  America.  Analysis  of  satellite  data  for  the  last  decade  has  led  scientists 
with  the  National  Environmental  Satellite  Service  to  conclude  that  North  American  anow 
cover  showed  no  significant  change  during  the  entire  period  of  record.  Rather,  the  North 
American  total  winter  snow  cover  appears  to  be  remarkably  similar  year  to  year.  Eurasion 
snow  cover  on  the  other  hand  was  reported  to  be  much  more  variable. 

w  National  Research  Council,  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "Weather  and 
Climate  Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  p.  156. 


181 


]  to  35  percent  during  summer  depending  on  the  location  and  size  of 
the  irrigated  areas  in  the  States  of  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Oklahoma,  and 
Texas. 

Acting  similarly  to  the  manner  in  which  urban  industrial  centers 
affect  weather  in  and  downwind  of  them,  irrigated  areas  may  be  said 
to  be  a  focal  point  for  both  rain  initiation  and  rain  enhancement  or 
redistribution,  under  conditions  when  rain  is  likely.75' 76 

Stick!  (1975)  also  found  evidence  of  irrigation-related  rainfall 
,  anomalies  in  the  Columbia  Basin  of  Washington.  Explaining  that  the 
increase  in  rainfall  is  real,  he  offered  the  following  explanation : 

The  moisture  added  by  irrigation  is  evaporated  and  must  eventually  return 
I  to  the  Earth's  surface  as  precipitation.  The  question  is  where  and  when?  The 
[Columbia]  basin  is  nearly  surrounded  by  mountains.  The  surface  layer  of  air 
in  the  basin  will  eventually  be  carried  over  the  mountains  [at  the  eastern  margin 
of  the  basin],  and  if  additional  moisture  has  been  added  to  the  air  *  *  *  air,  we 
would  expect  additional  precipitation  in  the  foothills.  This  appears  to  be  what 
happens  during  the  two  months  [of  July  and  August]  when  additional  evapora- 
tion is  greatest.77 

RECAPITULATION* 

In  review,  tables  2,  3,  and  4  summarize  much  of  the  pertinent  infor- 
mation presented  in  the  preceding  sections.  They  are,  respectively, 
"Inadvertent  Effects  on  Ten  Weather  Phenomena,"  "Chronic  Low- 
Level  Pollutants :  Mankind's  Leverage  Points  on  Climate,"  and  "Pos- 
sible Causal  Factors  in  Future  Climatic  Change  to  the  Year  2000  A.D." 

TABLE  2. — INADVERTENT  EFFECTS  ON  10  WEATHER  PHENOMENA  1 


Importance/signifi- 

Certainty  of  inad-      Scale  of  inadvertent    cance  of  inadvert- 
Phenomenon  vertent  effect  effect  ent  effect 


1.  Visibility  and  haze  

 Certain.  

 Meso  

Major. 

Possible  

 Macro  

Moderate. 

2.  Solar  radiation  and  sunshine  

 Certain  

 Meso  

Do. 

3.  Cloudiness  

 ....do  

 Urban  

Do. 

Probable  

 Meso   

Do. 

4.  Precipitation  (quantity).  

 Certain  

  Urban  

Major. 

Possible  

 Meso  or  macro  

Moderate. 

Precipitation  (quality)..  

 Certain  

 Urban  

Major. 

 do  

 Meso  

Unknown. 

Possible  

 Macro  

Do. 

5.  Thunderstorms  (hail/heavy  rain)  

 Certain.  

  Urban  

Major. 

Possible  

 Meso  

Do. 

6.  Severe  storms  (tornados,  other)  

  Unknown  

  Unknown  

Unknown. 

7.  Temperature   

 Certain...  

 Urban   

Moderate. 

Possible  

 Populated  meso  

Minor. 

8.  Wind/circulation.  

 Urban  

Moderate. 

Unlikely  

 Meso  

Unknown. 

9.  Fog  

 Urban/micro  

Major. 

10.  Humidity  

Moderate. 

 do  

 Meso  

Do. 

i  From  "Final  Report  to  the  National  Science  Foundation  on  the  Third  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification  Workshop,'! 
Hartford,  Conn.,  May  23-27, 1977.  Hartford.  The  Center  for  Environment  and  Man,  Inc.,  1977. 

Note.— Micro:  less  than  or  equal  to  1  km;  urban:  less  than  or  equal  to  30  km;  meso:  30  to  150  km;  macro:  greater  than 
150  km. 


75  Schickedanz,  Paul  T..  The  Effect  of  Irrigation  on  Precipitation  In  the  Great  Plains. 
Final  report  on  an  investigation  of  potential  alterations  in  summer  rainfall  associated 
with  widespread  irrigation  in  the  Great  Plains,  Urbana,  111.,  Illinois  State  Water  Survey, 

1976.  105  pp. 

76  Schickendanz,  Paul  T.,  "Extra-Area  Effects  from  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification." 
In  preprints  of  Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification, 
Champaign-Urbana,  111.,  Oct.  10-13,  1977.  Boston,  American  Meteorological  Society, 

1977,  pp.  134-137. 

"Stidd,  Charles  K.,  "Irrigation  Increases  Rainfall?"  Science,  vol.  188,  Apr.  18,  1975, 
pp.  279-281.  In  Effect  of  Large-Scale  Irrigation  on  Climate  in  the  Columbia  Basin, 
Science,  vol.  184,  Apr.  12,  1974,  pp.  121-127.  Fowler  and  Helvey  argue  that  small  scale 
site  changes  may  occur,  but  the  widespread  climatic  effects  of  irrigation  may  well  be 
minimal.  Furthermore,  they  contend  that  the  available  precipitation  records  for  the 
basin  do  not  verify  Stidd's  conclusion  that  precipitation  increased  because  of  irrigation. 


182 


183 


184 


Tssues  in  Inadvertent  Weather  and  Climate  Modification 
climatic  barriers  to  long-term  energy  growth 
Revelle  and  Suess  (1957)  stated: 

Human  beings  are  now  carrying  out  a  large  scale  geophysical  experiment  of 
a  kind  that  could  not  have  happened  in  the  past  nor  be  repeated  in  the  future. 
Within  a  few  centuries  we  are  returning  to  the  atmosphere  and  ocean  the  con- 
centrated organic  carbon  stored  in  the  sedimentary  rocks  over  hundreds  of  mil- 
lions of  years.  This  experiment  may  yield  a  far-reaching  insight  into  the  processes 
of  determining  weather  and  climate.78 

Thus  stated  is  the  case  for  diligent  observation  of  the  consequences 
of  the  man-generated  flux  of  carbon  dioxide  to  the  atmosphere.  Left 
unstated  is  perhaps  the  greater  need  to  anticipate  the  consequences 
well  enough  to  keep  them  within  acceptable  limits. 

Even  though  carbon  dioxide  makes  up  a  small  fraction  (less  than 
one  one-thousandth  of  the  total  atmospheric  mass)  of  the  gases  that 
comprise  the  atmosphere,  it  is  crucial  in  determining  the  Earth's 
temperature  because  it  traps  some  of  the  Earth's  heat  to  produce  the 
so-called  greenhouse  effect. 

Worldwide  industrial  civilization  may  face  a  major  decision  over 
the  next  few  decades — whether  to  continue  reliance  on  fossil  fuels  as 
principal  sources  of  energy  or  to  invest  the  research  and  engineering 
effort,  and  the  capital,  that  will  make  it  possible  to  substitute  other 
energy  sources  for  fossil  fuels  within  the  next  50  years.  The  second 
alternative  presents  many  difficulties,  but  the  possible  climatic  con- 
sequences of  reliance  on  fossil  fuels  for  another  one  or  two  centuries 
may  be  critical  enough  as  to  leave  no  other  choice. 

The  climatic  questions  center  around  the  increase  in  atmospheric 
carbon  dioxide  that  might  result  from  continuing  and  increasing  use 
of  fossil  fuels.  In  110  years  since  about  1860  a  12-percen.t  increase  in 
the  concentration  of  carbon  dioxide  had  taken  place,  but  because  of 
the  exponential  nature  of  the  consumption  of  energy  and  the  burning 
of  fossil  fuels  the  next  10-12  percent  increase  would  take  only  about 
20  years  and  the  next  10-12  percent  increase  beyond  that  only  about 
10  years.  By  this  time  the  climatic  impact  of  the  carbon  dioxide  should 
(according  to  model  calculations)  cause  a  climatic  warming  of  about 
1°C  (1.8°F).  Four  questions  are  crucial : 

1.  What  concentrations  of  carbon  dioxide  can  be  expected  in  the 
atmosphere  at  different  times  in  the  future,  for  given  rates  of  combus- 
tion of  fossil  fuels  ? 

2.  What  climatic  changes  might  result  from  increased  atmospheric 
carbon  dioxide? 

3.  What  would  be  the  consequences  of  such  climatic  changes  for 
human  societies  and  for  the  natural  environment  ? 

4.  "What,  if  any,  countervailing  human  actions  could  diminish  the 
climatic  changes  or  mitigate  their  consequences  ?  79 

Whether  such  a  warming  would  influence  the  extent  of  ice  and  snow 
at  the  polar  caps  or  influence  the  level  of  the  world  ocean  cannot  be 

■«  Rpvelle  R.  and  H.  E.  Suess,  "Carbon  Dioxide  Exchange  Between  the  Atmosphere 
and  Ocean,''  and  the  "Question  of  an  Increase  in  Atmospheric  Carbon  Dioxide  During 
the  Past  Decades,"  Tellus.  vol.  9,  No.  1,  1957,  p.  18.  .  „ 

n  National  Research  Council,  Geophysics  Research  Board,  "Energy  and  Climare,    p.  1. 


185 


said  with  certainty.  Neither  can  it  be  said  whether  such  a  warming 
would  push  the  grain  belts  of  the  world  poleward  by  several  hundred 
kilometers  thereby  disrupting  the  present  patterns  of  agriculture. 
These  are  possibilities,  but  climatic  theory  is  yet  too  crude  to  be  certain. 
The  only  certain  proof  that  the  carbon  dioxide-greenhouse  theory  is 
correct  will  come  when  the  atmosphere  itself  ''performs  the  experi- 
ment" of  proving  present  estimates  too  high,  or  too  low.  An  important 
point  remains,  though,  and  that  is :  The  uncertainty  in  present  scien- 
tific estimates  of  potential  climatic  consequences  of  increased  energy 
use  is  not  biased  toward  optimism.80 

Carbon  dioxide  is  not  the  only  byproduct  of  the  burning  of  fossil 
fuels.  Another  form  of  atmospheric  pollution  results  from  the  intro- 
duction of  dust  and  smoke  particles,  which,  when  suspended  in  air.  are 
called  atmospheric  aerosols.  The  word  "aerosols"  is  a  term  used  to 
describe  the  suspension  of  any  kind  of  particle  in  a  gas.  These  particles 
can  be  solid  like  dust,  sand.  ice.  and  soot.  Or  they  can  be  droplets  like 
the  water  particles  in  clouds  and  fog  or  the  liquid  chemicals  that  are 
dispensed  as  droplets  from  aerosol  spray  cans.  The  air  contains  tril- 
lions upon  trillions  of  aerosol  particles,  which,  like  carbon  dioxide, 
comprise  only  a  minute  fraction  of  the  total  atmospheric  mass. 

Despite  their  relatively  small  volume,  aerosols  can  affect  the  climate, 
primarily  by  absorbing  and  scattering  back  to  space  some  of  the  sun- 
light that  could  have  otherwise  reached  the  Eartlrs  surface.  Industry 
is  not  the  only  human  activity  that  causes  aerosols.  They  are  also  pro- 
duced in  great  quantities  by  a  variety  of  agricultural  activities  and 
practices,  and  a  significant  fraction  of  the  particle  loading  of  the 
atmosphere  is  of  natural  origin. 

A  consensus  among  scientists  today  would  not  be  forthcoming  as  to 
whether  an  increase  in  aerosols  would  result  in  a  cooling  of  the  climat  <3 
or  a  warming  of  the  climate,  because  aerosols  will  cool  the  climate  if 
they  are  relatively  whiter  than  the  surface  over  which  they  lie,  or, 
alternatively,  they  will  warm  the  Earth  if  they  are  relatively  darker 
than  the  surface  over  which  they  are  suspended.  The  dust  that  exists  in 
the  atmosphere  today  is  highly  nonuniform  in  both  geographic  distri- 
bution and  relative  brightness  as  compared  to  the  underlying  surface. 
Therefore,  one  cannot  be  absolutely  certain  whether  dust  contributes 
to  climatic  warming  or  can  be  implicated  in  climatic  cooling.sl 

THOUGHTS  AND  REFLECTIONS  CAN  WE  CONTEMPLATE  A 

FOSSIL-FUEL-FREE  WORLD? 

Putting  together  the  different  parts  of  the  story  of  climate  and 
energy,  what  picture  emerges?  How  seriously  do  we  respond  to  the 
possibility  that  the  present  rate  of  increase  of  fossil  fuel  burning  is 
likely  to  have  noticeable  consequences  for  climate  by  the  end  of  this 
century,  but  not  become  a  serious  problem  until  well  into  the  next 
century?  On  the  longer  time  scale,  the  picture  that  emerges  is  rather 
startling  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Wallace  Broecker  of  the  Lamont-Doherty 
Geological  Observatory,  who  explains,  "Consumption  of  the  bulk  of 
the  world's  known  fossil  fuel  reserves  would  plunge  our  planet  into  a 

80  Schneider,  Stephen  H.,  "Climate  Change  and  the  World  Predicament."  Climatic 
Change,  vol.  1,  No.  1,  March  1977,  pp.  31-33. 
61  Ibid.,  pp.  34,  35. 


186 


superinterglacial,  the  likes  of  which  the  world  lias  not  experienced  in 
the  last  million  years."  82 

Admittedly,  we  are  talking  here  of  possibilities,  not  certainties.  The 
climatic  consequences  of  massive  fossil  fuel  consumption  may  be  less 
severe  than  assessments  project,  but  they  might  be  more  severe.  Man- 
kind eventually  may  discover  a  new  energy  source  that  will  obviate  the 
need  to  use  fossil  reserves  so  extensively  for  that  purpose,  and  yet  a 
fossil-fuel-free  world  in  the  relatively  near  future  is  so  bizarre  an  idea 
it  is  hard  even  to  talk  about  it  seriously.  Or  perhaps  technology  could 
develop  a  cosmetic,  such  as  the  introduction  of  an  artificial  dust  layer 
surrounding  the  Earth  to  screen  some  of  the  incoming  sunlight.  This 
could  tend  to  offset  the  warming  effect  of  the  added  carbon  dioxide. 

What  would  happen  if  society  elected  to  ignore  the  problem  of 
carbon  dioxide  until  it  manifested  itself  (perhaps  in  another  20  years) 
in  the  form  of  a  clear  signal  that  a  global  warming  trend  had  begun 
that  was  unmistakably  attributable  to  the  further  accumulation  of 
carbon  dioxide  in  the  atmosphere?  Delaying  until  then  a  mandated 
action  to  phase  over  the  principal  energy  sources  from  fossil  fuels  to 
other  alternative  kinds  of  fuels  and  taking  into  account  another 
several  decades  for  the  transition  to  be  completed  would  put  us  half- 
way into  the  next  century  before  the  problem  could  be  shut  off  at  its 
source.  But  perhaps  the  most  disturbing  aspect  of  the  carbon  dioxide 
problem  is  that  the  effects  of  carbon  dioxide  would  endure  for  hundreds 
of  years,  even  after  the  abandonment  of  the  fossil  fuel  economy,  because 
of  the  long  recovery  time  associated  with  the  processes  that  would  rid 
the  atmosphere  of  excess  carbon  dioxide  and  establish  an  equilibrium 
condition. 

This  carbon  dioxide  Sword  of  Damocles,  if  indeed  it  exists,  implies 
development  of  solar  (including  wind,  ocean,  biomass,  etc.)  fisson, 
fusion,  and  geothermal  at  a  somewhat  more  rapid  pace  than  is  gen- 
erally recognized.83 

Asserts  J.  Murray  Mitchell,  Jr. : 

The  alternative  is  clear.  Ours  is  the  generation  that  must  come  to  grips  with 
the  carbon  dixoide  problem  and  mount  a  vigorous  research  effort  to  allow  us  to 
understand  all  of  its  ramifications  for  the  future.  Ours  is  the  generation  that  may 
have  to  act,  and  act  courageously,  to  phase  out  our  accustomed  reliance  on  fossil 
fuels  before  we  have  all  the  knowledge  that  we  would  like  to  have  to  feel  that 
such  action  is  absolutely  necessary.  *  *  *  We  can  scarcely  afford  to  leave  the 
carbon  dioxide  problem  to  the  next  generation.84 

RESEARCH  NEEDS  AND  DEFICIENCIES 

Despite  everything  that  science  has  learned  about  the  broad  charac- 
teristics of  climate  and  climatic  history,  relatively  little  is  known  of 
the  major  processes  of  climatic  change.  Lack  of  knowledge  still  is  a 


82  Mitchell,  J.  Murray^  Jr.,  "Carbon  Dioxide  and  Future  Climate,"  p.  9. 

83  Rotty,  R.  M.  and  A.  M.  Weinherg,  "How  Long  Is  Coal's  Future,"  pp.  o5-57. 
M  Mitchell,  J.  Murray,  Jr.,  "Carbon  Dioxide  and  Future  Climate,"  p.  9. 


187 


major  barrier  to  accurate  forecasting  and  understanding  of  potential 
inadvertent  modification  of  weather  and  climate.  The  atmosphere  and 
the  ocean  make  up  such  a  complex  and  rapidly  changing  system  that 
even  short-range  forecasts  may  often  be  incorrect.  Gathering  sufficient 
information  about  global  climate  is  of  importance  if  atmospheric 
scientists  are  to  construct  the  detailed  computerized  models  capable  of 
rapidly  analyzing  enormous  amounts  of  data  concerning  each  com- 
ponent of  the  climatic  system,  which  includes  not  only  the  atmosphere 
but  the  world  ocean,  the  ice  masses,  and  the  exposed  land  surface. 

Observations  are  essential  to  the  development  of  an  understanding 
of  climatic  change.  Without  them,  theories  will  remain  theories  and 
models  would  be  of  limited  usefulness.  Observational  records  need  to 
be  extended  in  both  time  and  space  to  facilitate  adequate  documenta- 
tion of  the  climatic  events  that  have  occurred  in  the  past  and  monitor- 
ing of  the  climatically  important  physical  processes  occurring  now. 

Knowledge  of  the  mechanisms  of  climatic  change  may  be  at  least  as 
fragmentary  as  the  state  of  the  data.  Not  only  are  the  basic  scientific 
questions  largely  unanswered,  but  in  many  cases  not  even  enough  is 
known  to  pose  the  key  questions.  What  are  the  most  important  causes 
of  natural  climatic  variation,  and  which  are  the  most  important  or 
most  sensitive  of  the  many  processes  involved  in  the  interaction  of  the 
air,  sea,  ice,  and  land  components  of  the  climatic  system  ?  There  is  no 
doubt  that  the  Earth's  climates  have  changed  in  the  past  and  will  likely 
change  in  the  future.  But  will  it  be  possible  to  recognize  the  first  phases 
of  a  truly  significant  climatic  change  when  it  does  occur  ? 

In  a  1975  report,  "Understanding  Climate  Change :  A  Program  for 
Action/'  the  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research 
Program  of  the  Xational  Research  Council  enumerated  the  principal 
approaches  to  these  problems  emphasizing  the  interdependence  of  the 
major  components  of  a  climatic  research  program  and  posing  a  number 
of  key  questions.  The  components  included : 

Climatic  data  analysis :  What  has  happened  in  the  past? 

Empirical  studies :  How  does  the  system  work? 

Monitoring :  What  is  going  on  now  ? 

Numerical  models:  What  is  shown  by  climatic  simulations? 

Theoretical  studies :  How  much  do  we  really  understand  ? 

Climatic  impacts :  What  does  it  all  mean  to  man  ? 

Future  climates :  How  and  when  is  the  climate  going  to  change  ? 
The  various  components  of  the  climatic  research  program  are  to  a 
great  extent  interdependent :  Data  are  needed  to  check  general  circula- 
tion models  and  to  calibrate  the  simpler  models ;  the  models  are  needed 
to  test  hypotheses  and  to  project  future  climates :  monitoring  is  needed 
to  check  the  projections ;  and  all  are  needed  to  assess  the  consequences.85 


85  National  Research  Council,  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research 
Program.  "Understanding  Climatic  Change  :  A  Program  for  Action,"  Washington,  National 
Acadmy  of  Sciences,  1975,  pp.  5,  6. 


188 


TABLE  5.— SUMMARY  OF  CLIMATIC  INDEX  MONITORING  PROGRAM 


Effort  Frequency 

variable  or  index  Method  Coverage  required •  required2 

Atmospheric  indices: 

Solar  constant  Satellite  Global   N  W 

Absorbed  radiation,  albedo   do   do   P  W 

Latent  heating...  ...do  do.   N  W 

Surface  latent  heat  flux  do   World  ocean   N  W 

Surface  sensible  heat  flux  do   Regional   N  W 

Cloudiness   do   Global   P  W 

Surface  wind  over  ocean  Radar  scattering   World  ocean  N  W 

Oceanic  indices: 

Sea-surface  temperature  Ships,  satellites,  buoys...  World  ocean   E  W 

Surface-layer  heat  storage  XBT,  AXBT,  buoys  Mid-latitude   and   low-   E,  N  W 

latitude  oceans. 

Heat  transport  Moored  buoys  Selected  sections   N  W 

Temperature  structure  .Ships    do   E  S 

Surface  salinity  Ships,  buoys.   High  latitudes   E  W 

Sea  level  .1  Tide  gauges  Selected    coastal    and   E  W 

island  sites. 

Composition,  dissolved  gases  Conventional  sampling. Selected  sections  E  S 

Cryospheric  indices: 

Floating  ice  extent  Satellite   Polar  seas,  lakes  E  M 

Ice-sheet  budget  parameters   do  Greenland,  Antarctica  N  Y 

Mountain  glacier  extent  do  Selected  sites   E  Y 

Snow  cover.  do   Continents   E  M 

Surface  and  hydrologic  indices: 

River  discharge    Flow  gauges  Selected  sites  E,  N  W 

Soil  moisture  Satellite  Land  areas  E  W 

Lake  levels  Gauges   Selected  sites   E  W 

Precipitation  Satellite,  radar,  gauges...  Global   E  W 

Composition  and  turbidity  indices: 

Chemical  composition  Sampling  Selected  sites   E  S 

Aerosols  and  dust  Satellite  Global.   E  W 

Anthropogenic  indices: 

Thermal  pollution  Sampling..  Continents  and  coasts  N  W 

Air  and  water  pollution  do  Global..   E  W 

Land  use  Satellite  Continents  E  Y 

1  N,  completely  new  monitoring  effort  required;  E,  expansion  of  present  monitoring  efforts  required;  P,  present  (or 
slightly  expanded)  monitoring  efforts  satisfactory  but  coordination  and  further  analysis  required, 
a  W,  weekly  (or  possibly  daily  in  some  cases);  M,  monthly;  S,  seasonally;  Y,  yearly  (or  possibly  decadal  in  some  cases). 

Source:  Natichal  Research  Council,  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research  Program,  "Understanding 
Climatic  Change:  A  Program  for  Action,"  Washington,  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  1975;  pp.  78-79. 

The  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  also  of  the  National  Re- 
search Council,  stated  in  a  1973  report  entitled  "Weather  and  Climate 
Modification :  Problems  and  Progress"  that  if  society  is  to  deal  with 
long-term  problems  of  inadvertent  weather  modification  and  climatic 
changes  caused  by  man  and  his  activities,  then  urgent  attention  and 
action  are  required  at  the  earliest  possible  moment.  The  Committee 
outlined  several  courses  of  action  that  should  be  undertaken,  each  con- 
tributing to  a  part  of  the  necessary  work  to  be  accomplished: 

1.  A  worldwide  network  of  ground-based  stations  is  needed  to  moni- 
tor the  properties  of  the  atmosphere  with  particular  attention  being 
given  to  those  gases  and  aerosols  affecting  radiation  and  heat  transfer. 
Precipitation  collection  should  be  undertaken  for  the  analysis  of 
atmospheric  chemical  constituents.  Surface  monitoring  efforts  should 
also  be  augmented  by  airborne  monitoring  of  particles  and  gases  in  the 
atmosphere.  Table  5  summarizes  in  detail  the  variables  to  be  moni- 
tored, the  method  of  monitoring,  coverage,  effort  required  and  fre- 
quency required. 

2.  Since  influence  on  climate  caused  by  human  factors  is  a  global 
matter,  internationally  cooperative  plans  should  be  established  that 
will  provide  long-term  and  uniform  monitoring  data. 


189 


3.  Continuous  monitoring  of  the  Earth  by  satellites  should  be  devel- 
oped to  measure  not  only  cloud  cover  and  cloud  types  but  also  the  ther- 
mal characteristics  of  the  atmosphere  and  the  Earth's  surface,  as  well 
as  related  variations  in  the  albedo  of  the  Earth.  Satellite  measurements 
should  be  complemented  by  a  program  of  ground-based  remote  sensing 
of  the  dynamical,  chemical,  and  particulate  properties  of  the 
atmosphere. 

4.  Computer  capabilities  for  simulation  of  climate  and  climatic 
changes  should  be  fully  utilized.  Climatic  models  eventually  may  prove 
to  be  quite  different  from  the  present  general  circulation  models.  How- 
ever, if  we  are  to  reach  the  capability  to  assess  the  consequences  of 
further  human  intervention,  climatic  model  development  must  be 
promptly  undertaken.86 

Many  of  the  efforts  envisaged  are  of  an  obvious  international  charac- 
ter, and  the  degree  to  which  they  should  be  regarded  as  national  versus 
international  activities  is  not  of  critical  importance.  The  important 
point  is,  however,  that  there  are  international  efforts  now  underway  of 
drect  relevance  to  the  climatic  problem. 

The  World  Meteorological  Organization  (WMO)  and  the  Interna- 
tional Council  of  Scientific  Unions  (ICSU)  jointly  organized  a  global 
atmospheric  research  program  (GARP)  in  1967.  GARP  goals  in- 
clude :  providing  the  improved  understanding  of  the  global  circulation 
needed  to  extend  the  range  and  accuracy  of  weather  forecasts;  under- 
standing the  physical  basis  of  climate  and  climatic  fluctuations ;  and 
providing  a  firm  foundation  for  the  World  Weather  Watch 
(WWW).87 

Several  GARP  regional  expirements  are  planned  in  order  to  exam- 
ine specific  processes.  Hie  GARP  Atlantic  Tropical  Experiment 
(GATE)  followed  the  Barbados  Oceanographic  and  Meteorological 
Experiment  (BOMEX,  1969)  in  a  succession  of  experiments  designed 
to  gain  increased  understanding  of  the  atmosphere  and  the  causes  of 
climatic  variation  and  change.  The  primary  objective  of  GATE  was 
to  learn  more  about  the  meteorology  of  the  tropical  equatorial  belt 
where  vast  quantities  of  heat  and  moisture,  carried  upward  by  orga- 
nized convective  systems,  are  transported  and  redistributed  to  higher 
latitudes,  ultimately  affecting  global  atmospheric  circulation  patterns. 
Because  the  tropics  are  believed  to  be  a  key  to  these  circulation  pat- 
terns, scientists  expect  data  from  GATE  to  help  them  better  under- 
stand the  global  climate  machine.  Conducted  as  scheduled  from  June  15 
to  September  30,  1974,  GATE  had  the  cooperation  of  some  72  coun- 
tries. In  addition  to  BOMEX  and  GATE,  experiments  designed  to 
contribute  to  the  understanding  of  specific  oceanic-atmospheric  proc- 
esses in  selected  regions  are  :  the  Air  Mass  Transformation  Experiment 
( AMTEX) ,  the  Monsoon  Experiment  (MONEX) ,  and  the  Polar  Ex- 
periment (POLEX).  These  regional  experiments  and  the  knowledge 
gleaned  from  them  will  culminate  in  a  truly  international  global  ob- 
serving experiment,  the  First  GARP  Global  Experiment  (FGGE) 
scheduled  for  the  late  1978-79  timeframe. 

86  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  'Weather  and  Climate 
Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  pp.  160,  161. 

87  WWW  is  an  operational  program  of  member  nations  of  the  WMO  for  making  available 
the  basic  meteorological  and  related  environmental  information  needed  by  each  member 
aation  to  supplement  and  support  Its  meteorological  services  and  research. 


34-857—79  15 


190 


The  program  goals  of  GARP  intersect  with  the  objectives  of  other 
international  environmental  programs.  One  such  program  is  the  Inter- 
governmental Oceanographic  Commission  Integrated  Global  Ocean 
Station  System  (IGOSS)  being  developed  jointly  with  the  World 
Meteorological  Organization  to  provide  more  extensive  and  timely 
information  for  analysis  and  prediction  of  the  state  of  the  oceans  and 
for  research  purposes.  This  is  accomplished  through  the  development 
of  a  comprehensive  monitoring  system  for  the  total  physical  ocean- 
atmosphere  environment.  Another  is  EARTH  WATCH,  a  major  com- 
ponent of  the  United  Nations  Enviornment  Program  (UNEP)  being 
developed  to  monitor  and  assess  the  state  of  the  oceans,  atmosphere, 
land  and  human  health  in  order  that  rational  decisions  can  be  made 
for  the  management  of  the  environment.  EARTHWATCH  will  also 
interact  with  and  depend  on  the  monitoring  and  research  capabilities 
of  GARP.  A  key  component  of  the  UNEP/EARTHWATCH  global 
baseline  and  regional  monitoring  effort  is  the  Global  Environment 
Monitoring  System,  which  is  designed  to  measure  and  monitor 
priority  pollutants  and  related  factors  of  the  atmospheric  environ- 
ment, thus  permitting  quantitative  assessment  of  the  global  impact 
of  manmade  and  natural  influences  on  weather  and  climate. 

The  Global  Observing  System  provides  worldwide  meteorological 
and  related  environment  observation  data  needed  by  the  World 
Weather  Watch  and  GARP.  The  overall  system  consists  of  two  subsys- 
tem? :  a  space-based  satellite  subsystem,  composed  of  two  types  of 
satellites,  those  in  polar  orbit  and  those  in  geostationary  orbit;  and  a 
surf  ace-based  subsystem  composed  of  basic  synoptic  surface  and  upper 
air  networks,  other  networks  of  stations  on  land  and  sea,  and  aircraft 
meteorological  observations. 

The  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research  Program 
believes  that  these  observational  programs  planned  in  support  of 
GARP  offer  an  unparalleled  opportunity  to  observe  the  global  atmos- 
phere, and  furthermore  that  every  effort  should  be  made  to  use  these 
data  for  climatic  purposes  as  well  as  for  the  purposes  of  weather  pre- 
diction. The  Committee  emphasized  however,  that  the  climatic  system 
consists  of  important  nonatmospheric  components,  including  the 
world's  oceans,  ice  masses,  and  land  surfaces,  together  with  elements 
of  the  biosphere.  While  it  is  not  necessary  to  measure  all  of  these  com- 
ponents in  the  same  detail  with  which  the  atmosphere  is  observed, 
their  roles  in  climatic  variation  should  not  be  overlooked.88 

The  Committee's  1975  report,  "Understanding  Climatic  Change: 
A  Program  for  Action,"  further  stated  that : 

The  problem  of  climatic  variation  differs  from  that  of  weather  forecasting  by 
the  nature  of  the  data  sets  required.  The  primary  data  needs  of  weather  predic- 
tion are  accurate  and  dense  synoptic  observations  of  the  atmosphere's  present 
and  future  states,  while  the  data  needed  for  studies  of  climatic  variation  are 
longer-term  statistics  of  a  much  wider  variety  of  variables.  When  climatic  varia- 
tions over  long  time  scales  are  considered,  these  variables  must  be  supplied  from 
fields  outside  of  observational  meteorology.  Thus,  an  essential  characteristic  of 
climate  is  its  involvement  of  a  wide  range  of  nonatmospheric  scientific  disciplines, 
for  example,  oceanography,  glaciology,  hydrology,  astronomy,  geology,  and 
paleantology  as  well  as  from  the  biological  and  social  sciences  of  ecology,  geog- 
raphy,  archaeology,  history,  economics,  and  sociology. 


88  N'.-itionnl  Research  Council,  U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research 
Program,  "Understanding  Climatic  Change:  A  Program  for  Action,"  pp.  105,  106. 


191 


The  types  of  numerical  models  needed  for  climatic  research  also  differ  from 
those  of  weather  prediction.  The  atmospheric  general  circulation  models  do  not 
need  a  time-dependent  ocean  for  weather-forecasting  purposes  over  periods  of  a 
week  or  two.  For  climatic  change  purposes,  on  the  other  hand,  such  numerical 
models  must  include  the  changes  of  oceanic  heat  storage.  Such  a  slowly  varying 
feature  may  be  regarded  as  a  boundary  or  external  condition  for  weather  predic- 
tion but  becomes  an  internal  part  of  the  system  for  climatic  variation.89 

In  view  of  these  characteristics,  the  Committee  suggested  that  while 
the  GARP  concern  with  climate  was  a  natural  one,  the  problem  of 
climate  goes  much  beyond  the  present  basis  and  emphasis  of  GARP. 
Accordingly,  they  recommended  that  the  global  climate  studies  that 
are  under  way  within  GARP  be  viewed  as  leading  to  the  organization 
of  a  new  and  long-term  international  program  devoted  specifically  to 
the  study  of  climate  and  climatic  variation,  an  international  climatic 
research  program  (ICRP). 

As  viewed  by  the  Committee  the  main  thrust  of  the  international 
climatic  program  would  be  the  collection  and  analysis  of  climatic  data 
during  a  series  of  international  climatic  decades  (ICD)  designated  for 
the  period  19S0-2000.  During  this  period,  the  cooperation  of  all  nations 
would  be  sought  to  participate  in  an  intensive  effort  to  develop  and 
secure  as  complete  a  global  climatic  data  base  as  possible.  The  Com- 
mittee urged  the  creation  of  an  international  cooperative  program  for 
the  monitoring  of  selected  climatic  indices  and  the  extraction  of  his- 
torical and  proxy  climatic  data  unique  to  each  nation,  which  would 
include,  but  not  be  limited  to,  such  indices  as  glaciers,  rain  forest  pre- 
cipitation, lake  levels,  local  desert  history,  tree  rings,  and  soil  records. 
This  would  take  the  form  of  an  international  paleoclimatic  data  net- 
work (IPDX) ,  as  a  subprogram  of  the  ICRP. 

To  promote  wider  international  participation  in  climatic  research, 
it  was  recommended  that  programs  and  activities  be  developed  to 
encourage  international  cooperation  in  climatic  research  and  to  facili- 
tate the  participation  of  developing  nations  that  do  not  yet  have  ade- 
quate training  or  research  facilities.  Internationally  supported  re- 
gional climatic  studies  describing  and  modeling  local  climatic  anom- 
alies of  special  interest  were  also  recommended.90 

The  Committee  stressed  the  importance  of  international  cooperative 
programs  to  assess  the  impacts  of  presently  observed  climatic  changes 
on  the  economies  of  the  world's  nations,  including  the  effects  on  water 
supply,  food  production,  and  energy  utilization,  as  well  as  analyses  of 
the  regional  impacts  of  possible  future  climates. 

IMd.,  p.  106. 

00  The  World  Meteorological  Organization  headquarters  in  Geneva  is  planning  a  world 
conference  on  climate,  tentatively  to  be  held  in  1979. 


CHAPTER  5 


FEDERAL  ACTIVITIES  IN  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Overview  of  Federal  Activities 

The  Federal  Government  has  been  involved  for  over  30  years  in  a 
number  of  aspects  of  weather  modification,  through  activities  of  both 
the  Congress  and  the  executive  branch.  Since  1947,  weather  modifica- 
tion bills  pertaining  to  research  support,  operations,  policy  studies, 
regulations,  liabilities,  activity  reporting,  establishment  of  panels  and 
committees,  and  international  concerns  have  been  introduced  in  the 
Congress.  There  have  been  hearings  on  many  of  these  proposed  meas- 
ures, and  oversight  hearings  have  also  been  conducted  on  pertinent 
ongoing  programs.  A  total  of  six  public  laws  specifically  on  weather 
modification  have  been  enacted  since  1953,  while  others  have  included 
provisions  which  in  some  way  are  relevant  to  weather  modification. 
Resolutions  dealing  with  the  use  of  weather  modification  technology 
as  a  weapon  by  U.S.  military  forces  and  promotion  of  a  U.N.  treaty 
prohibiting  such  activities  have  been  introduced  in  both  houses  of  the 
Congress,  and  one  such  resolution  was  passed  by  the  Senate. 

Federal  legislation  has  dealt  principally  with  three  aspects  of 
weather  modification — research  program  authorization  and  direction, 
collection  and  reporting  of  weather  modification  activities,  and  the 
commissioning  of  major  studies  on  recommended  Federal  policy  and 
the  status  of  technology.  In  addition  to  providing  direction  through 
authorizing  legislation,  the  Congress  has  initiated  one  major  Federal 
program  through  an  appropriations  bill  write-in,  and  this  program 
has  since  regularly  received  support  through  additional  appropria- 
tions beyond  its  recommended  OMB  funding  level. 

Identifiable  Federal  research  and  operational  weather  modification 
programs  can  be  traced  from  at  least  the  period  of  World  War  II; 
however,  the  research  programs  of  most  agencies  other  than  the  De- 
fense Department  were  not  begun  until  the  1950's  and  1960's.  "While 
these  research  and  development  programs  sponsored  at  various  times 
by  at  least  eight  departments  and  independent  agencies  have  consti- 
tuted its  major  involvement,  the  executive  branch  has  also  performed 
a  wide  range  of  other  weather  modification  activities.  Such  activities 
include  the  conduct  of  modest  operational  programs,  coordination  of 
Federal  research  programs,  collection  and  dissemination  of  U.S. 
weather  modification  activities,  sponsoring  of  in-depth  studies,  publi- 
cation of  a  large  variety  of  reports,  negotiation  for  international  re- 
strictions barring  hostile  use  of  weather  modification,  and  cooperation 
with  other  nations  in  planning  of  international  research  projects  or 
assisting  in  foreign  operational  programs.  The  latter  two  activities, 

(193) 


194 


both  essentially  international  in  scope,  are  only  noted  here  but  are  dis- 
cussed more  fully  in  the  chapter  on  international  aspects.1 

While  some  of  the  numerous  studies  on  weather  modification  have 
been  undertaken  at  the  direction  of  the  Congress,  others  have  been 
initiated  by  one  or  more  Federal  agencies  or  by  interagency  committees 
of  the  executive  branch.  Published  reports  have  included  those  which 
present  the  findings  and  recommendations  of  the  special  studies  under- 
taken, those  which  are  published  periodically  by  agencies  or  commit- 
tees with  regular  responsibilities  for  reporting  on  Federal  programs 
or  on  operational  activities,  and  the  many  publications  on  specific  re- 
search projects  which  are  prepared  by  the  individual  agencies  or  by 
contractors  and  grantees  participating  in  the  respective  projects.  Later 
in  this  chapter  some  of  the  Federal  reports  which  fall  into  the  first  two 
categories  are  identified  under  the  discussions  of  major  studies,  Fed- 
eral structure,  and  coordination  of  weather  modification;  reports 
from  the  third  category  are  referenced  from  time  to  time  throughout 
the  report.  Some  of  the  Federal  reports  are  included  in  the  selected 
bibliography  in  appendix  H  and  many  are  also  listed  in  the  other 
major  bibliographies  which  are  referenced  in  that  appendix. 

Legislative  and  Congressional  Activities 
federal  legislation  on  weather  modification 

Summary 

Congressional  interest  in  weather  modification  has  been  demon- 
strated by  the  fact  that  legislation  on  the  subject  has  been  introduced 
in  nearly  every  session  of  Congress  since  1947.  Nevertheless,  in  spite  of 
the  apparent  interest,  a  total  of  six  public  laws  relating  specifically  and 
directly  to  weather  modification  have  been  enacted  during  this  period, 
and  two  of  those  passed  were  mere  time  extensions  of  specific  provisions 
in  earlier  laws.2  Briefly,  these  laws  are : 

Public  Law  83-256  (67  Stat.  559)  of  August  13,  1953,  to  create 
an  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  to  perform  a  com- 
plete study  and  evaluation  of  public  and  private  experiments  in 
weather  modification  to  determine  the  U.S.  role  in  research,  opera- 
tions, and  regulation ; 

Public  Law  84-664  (70  Stat.  509)  of  July  9,  1956,  to  extend  the 
authorized  life  of  the  Advisory  Committee  for  2  years  through 
June  30, 1958 ; 

Public  Law  85-510  (72  Stat.  353)  of  July  12, 1958,  to  authorize 
and  direct  the  National  Science  Foundation  to  initiate  a  program 
of  study,  research,  and  evaluation  in  the  field  of  weather  modifica- 
tion and  to  prepare  an  annual  report  to  the  Congress  and  the 
President  on  weather  modification ; 

Public  Law  92-205  (85  Stat.  736)  of  December  18, 1971,  to  pro- 
vide for  the  reporting  of  weather  modification  activities  to  the 
Federal  Government  through  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  for 
dissemination  of  that  information  by  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
from  time  to  time ; 


1  See  ch.  10. 

*  Tliese  six  public  laws  are  reproduced  In  app.  I. 


195 


Public  Law  93-436  (88  Stat.  1212)  of  October  5, 1974,  to  extend 
appropriation  authorization  for  reporting  and  disseminating 
weather  modification  activities  through  the  Secretary  of  Com- 
merce, as  prescribed  by  Public  Law  92-205,  through  1977; 

Public  Law  94-490  (90  Stat.  2359)  of  October  13,  1976,  to 
authorize  and  direct  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  develop  a  na- 
tional policy  on  weather  modification  and  to  extend  appropriation 
authorization  for  reporting  and  disseminating  weather  modifica- 
tion activities,  as  prescribed  by  Public  Law  92-205,  through  1930. 
Although  not  exclusively  concerned  with  weather  modification, 
another  act,  Public  Law  90^t07  of  July  18, 1968,  amended  the  National 
Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950.  Section  11  of  this  new  act  specifically 
repealed  Public  Law  85-510,  by  which  the  XSF  had  been  directed  to 
initiate  and  support  a  program  of  study,  research,  and  evaluation  in 
weather  modification  and  to  report  annually  on  the  subject. 

Another  law  of  some  significance  to  weather  modification,  though 
much  broader  in  its  overall  purpose,  was  the  fiscal  year  1962  public 
works  appropriation,  Public  Law  87-330  (75  Stat.  722)  of  Septem- 
ber 30,  1961.  Through  a  $100,000  write-in  to  this  bill,  the  Congress 
initiated  the  atmospheric  water  resources  program  (Project  Sky- 
water)  ,  conducted  by  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  in  the  Department 
of  the  Interior.  Through  subsequent  public  works  appropriations  the 
Congress  has  continued  to  provide  direction  to  this  program  almost 
every  year  since  its  inception  and  has  provided  frequent  funding 
increases  over  levels  budgeted  by  the  administration. 

\The  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control 

Between  1951  and  1953  it  was  disclosed  in  congressional  hearings  on 
several  bills  introduced  by  both  parties  that  water  users  (farmers, 
ranchers,  electric  utilities,  and  municipalities)  were  spending  between 
$3  million  and  $5  million  annually  on  weather  modification  and  that 
such  activities  covered  about  10  percent  of  the  country's  land  area.3  It 
was  the  opinion  of  the  Congress  in  1953  that  "research  and  development 
in  the  field  of  weather  modification  have  attained  the  stage  at  which  the 
application  of  scientific  advances  in  this  field  appears  to  be  practical.*' 
but  also  that  "the  effect  of  the  use  of  measures  for  the  control  of  weather 
phenomena  upon  the  social,  economic,  and  political  structures  *  *  * 
and  upon  national  security  cannot  now  be  determined.  It  is  a  field  in 
which  unknown  factors  are  involved.  It  is  reasonable  to  anticipate, 
however,  that  modification  and  control  of  weather,  if  effective  on  a 
large  scale,  would  result  in  vast  and  far-reaching  benefits  to  agricul- 
ture, industry,  commerce,  and  the  general  welfare  and  common 
defense."  4 

Recognizing  possible  deleterious  consequences  which  might  follow 
application  of  weather  modification  techniques  with  inadequate  safe- 
guards or  incomplete  understanding,  and  realizing  that  weather  modi- 
fication experiments  or  operations  could  possibly  affect  areas  extending 
across  State  and  national  boundaries,  the  Congress  considered  that  such 
activities  "are  matters  of  national  and  international  concern"  and  ac- 
cordingly, declared  it  "to  be  the  policy  of  the  Congress,  in  order  to  effect 
the  maximum  benefit  which  may  result  from  experiments  and  opera- 

a  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  final  report,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Govern- 
ment Printing  Oflice.  Dec.  31,  1957,  vol.  I,  p.  8. 

4  Public  Law  S3-256  (67  Stat.  559),  Aug.  13,  1953,  statement  of  purpose  and  policy. 


196 


tions  designed  to  modify  and  control  weather,  to  correlate  and  evaluate 
the  information  derived  from  such  activity  and  to  cooperate  with  the 
several  States  and  the  duly  authorized  officials  thereof  with  respect  to 
such  activity,  all  to  the  end  of  encouraging  intelligent  experimentation 
and  the  beneficial  development  of  weather  modification  and  control, 
preventing  its  harmful  and  indiscriminate  exercise,  and  fostering 
sound  economic  conditions  in  the  public  interest."  5 

In  order  to  determine  the  extent  to  which  the  United  States  should  be 
involved  in  weather  modification  research  and/or  operations  and  in  the 
regulation  of  such  activities,  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Con- 
trol was  established  by  Public  Law  83-256,  approved  August  13, 1953, 
and  was  directed  by  that  law  to  make  a  complete  study  and  evaluation 
of  public  and  private  experiments  in  weather  control. 

The  Committee  was  to  be  composed  of  Government  and  non-Govern- 
ment members  in  about  equal  number  and,  in  carrying  out  its  man- 
date, was  given  authority  to  conduct  hearings,  to  acquire  pertinent 
information  and  records  from  departments  and  agencies  of  the  execu- 
tive branch,  and  to  enlist  the  services  of  personnel  of  any  agency  of 
the  Federal  Government  (with  the  consent  of  the  agency  concerned).6 
The  Committee  was  requested  to  submit  from  time  to  time  reports  on 
its  findings  and  recommendations  to  the  President  for  submission  to 
the  Congress  and  was  directed  to  submit  its  final  report  to  the  Presi- 
dent for  transmittal  to  the  Congress  by  June  30, 1956. 7  It  became  clear 
that  the  study  was  of  such  magnitude  that  additional  time  would  be 
required  for  its  successful  completion,  and  the  Committee  requested 
that  its  life  be  extended  2  years,  noting  that  .  .  it  has  succeeded  in 
establishing  some  positive  and  important  results  which  justify  the 
Federal  Government  continuing  its  special  interest  in  the  field. " 8 
Thereupon,  the  Congress  passed  Public  Law  84-664  (70  Stat.  509) 
of  July  9,  1956,  which  extended  the  date  for  completion  of  the  report 
until  June  30,  1958.  The  final  report  of  the  Committee  was  submitted 
to  the  President  on  December  31, 1957.9 

Direction  to  the  National  Science  Foundation 

The  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control  recognized  that  the 
development  of  weather  modification  rested  on  fundamental  knowl- 
edge obtainable  only  through  scientific  research  into  processes  in  the 
atmosphere  and  recommended  that  an  agency,  preferably  the  Na- 
tional Science  Foundation  (XSF),  be  designated  to  promote  and  sup- 
port meteorological  research  in  needed  fields,  to  coordinate  research 
projects,  and  to  constitute  a  central  point  for  assembly,  evaluation, 
and  dissemination  of  information.10  Accordingly,  when  the  Congress 
enacted  Public  Law  85-510  of  July  10,  1958,  which  amended  the  Na- 
tional Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950,  additional  responsibilities 
were  incorporated,  directing  the  Foundation : 

To  initiate  and  support  a  program  of  study,  research,  and  evaluation  in  the 
field  of  weather  modification,  giving  particular  attention  to  areas  that  have 

c  Ibid. 

•  Ibid.,  sec.  9. 

7  Ibid.,  sec.  10.  „   tl  y,.  _. 

s  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  first  interim  report,  Washington.  D.C.,  Feb- 
ruary 1956,  p.  ii.  _ 

9  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control.  "Final  Report  of  the  U.S.  Advisory  Com- 
mittee on  Weather  Control,"  Washington,  DC,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  March  6, 
1958,  in  two  volumes.  32  and  422.  pp.  (Recommendations  of  the  Committee  are  found  in 
tbi<  chapter,  p.  2''.R.  and  in  chapter  G. ) 

:o  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  pp.  vii-vili. 


197 


experienced  floods,  drought,  hail,  lightning,  fog,  tornadoes,  hurricanes,  or  other 
weather  phenomena,  and  to  report  annually  to  the  President  and  the  Congress 
thereon.11 

The  In  SF  was  further  directed  to  ".  .  .  consult  with  meterologists 
and  scientists  in  private  life  and  with  agencies  of  Government  inter- 
ested in,  or  affected  by,  experimental  research  in  the  field  of  weather 
control." 12  Authority  was  given  to  NSF  to  hold  hearings,  to  require 
the  keeping  of  records  and  furnishing  of  information  on  weather 
modification  research  and  operations,  and  to  inspect  records  and 
premises  as  appropriate  in  order  to  carry  out  the  responsibilities 
assigned. 

In  effect,  the  NSF  was  asigned  the  "lead  agency"  role  (a  term 
which  was  in  later  years  to  become  the  subject  of  much  debate  and 
discussion)  among  Federal  agencies  involved  in  weather  modification. 
A  decade  later,  the  Foundation  was  stripped  of  these  specific  respon- 
sibilities and  of  this  lead  agency  role  when  the  Congress  again 
amended  the  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950,  by  passing 
Public  Law  90-407  of  July  18, 1968.  Section  11  of  the  1968  law  struck 
section  14  and  paragraph  (9),  subsection  (a),  of  section  3  from  the 
National  Science  Foundation  Act,  terminating  as  of  September  1, 1968, 
the  responsibilities  spelled  out  in  these  sections  a  decade  earlier  with 
regard  to  weather  modification. 

The  Senate  report  which  accompanied  the  bill  subsequently  enacted 
as  Public  Law  90-407  stated  that  the  NSF  was  divested  of  these  func- 
tions ". . .  for  a  number  of  reasons :"  13 

One  [reason]  is  that  the  ramifications  of  weather  modification  are  so  broad 
as  to  encompass  far  more  issues  than  scientific  ones.  Another  is  that  progress 
in  this  area  has  reached  the  point  where  it  requires  much  developmental  work 
as  well  as  continued  research.  The  Departments  of  Commerce  and  Interior  are 
assuming  much  of  the  responsibility  in  this  area,  which  the  Foundation  may  con- 
tinue to  back  up  with  appropriate  support  for  some  of  the  research  still  needed. 
NSF  retains  ample  authority  to  continue  support  for  the  latter  .  .  .  and  clearly 
should  do  so.  The  Foundation  will  in  any  case  continue  those  research  activities 
necessary  to  preserve  continuity  in  the  program,  pending  passage  of  the  weather 
modification  legislation  now  pending.  In  the  latter  regard,  the  committee  calls 
attention  to  the  necessity  for  legislation  to  continue  elsewhere  in  the  executive 
branch  the  development  and  reporting  activities  which  NSF  will  not  have  author- 
ity to  support  after  September  1, 1968. 

Although  legislation  was  introduced  and  considered  by  the  Congress 
which  would  have  reassigned  this  lead  agency  role  to  another  agency, 
no  further  congressional  action  was  taken  on  weather  modification 
until  1971. 

Reporting  of  weather  modification  activities  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment 

Responsibility  for  maintaining  a  depository  for  information  on  U.S. 
weather  modification  activities  and  for  reporting  annually  on  Federal 
programs  and  the  general  status  of  the  field  rested  with  the  National 
Science  Foundation  for  the  10-year  period  from  1958  through  1968, 
after  which,  as  has  been  noted,  these  and  other  functions  were  sus- 
pended by  Public  Law  90-407. 

11  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950.  as  amended  by  Public  Law  S5-510  (72  Stat' 
358)  of  July  11.  1958.  sec.  3.  subsec.  fa),  par.  (9). 

12  Ibid.,  sec.  14. 

13  U.S.  Congress.  Senate.  Committee  on  Labor  and  Public  Welfare,  "National  Science 
Foundation — Functions — Administration."  report  to  accompany  H.R.  5404.  Washington, 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1968.  (90th  CoDg.,  2d  sess.  Senate  Kept.  No.  1137.) 


198 


After  a  lapse  of  over  3  years,  the  Congress  passed  Public  Law  92- 
205  (85  Stat.  736)  of  December  18,  1971,  which  directed  that  ".  .  .  no 
person  may  engage  or  attempt  to  engage  in  any  weather  modification 
activity  in  the  United  States  unless  he  submits  to  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  such  reports  with  respect  thereto,  in  such  form  and  con- 
taining such  information,  as  the  Secretary  may  by  rule  prescribe.  The 
Secretary  may  require  that  such  reports  be  submitted  to  him  before, 
during,  and  after  such  activity  or  attempt."  14  The  act  further  states 
that  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  is  charged  with  responsibility  to 
maintain  a  record  of  such  weather  modification  activities  in  the  United 
States  and  to  publish  summaries  of  the  activities  "from  time  to  time" 
as  deemed  appropriate,  Such  information  received  under  the  provi- 
sions of  this  law,  with  certain  exceptions,  is  to  be  made  fully  available 
to  the  public.15  Authority  was  provided  to  the  Secretary  to  obtain  the 
required  information  by  rule,  subpena,  or  other  means  and  to  inspect 
the  records  and  premises  of  persons  conducting  weather  modification 
projects,  as  necessary,  to  carry  out  assigned  responsibilities.  There  is 
also  provision  for  levying  fines  up  to  $10,000  on  any  person  for  non- 
compliance with  the  stipulations  of  the  law  requiring  the  reporting  of 
weather  modification  activities.  Public  Law  92-205  is  concerned  with 
the  reporting  of  weather  modification  projects,  however,  not  with 
their  regulation,  control,  or  evaluation. 

Within  the  Commerce  Department,  the  weather  modification  report- 
ing system  required  by  Public  Law  92-205  is  administered  on  behalf 
of  the  Secretary  by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Adminis- 
tration (NOAA).  Upon  subsequent  advertisement  of  Commerce  De- 
partment rules  in  the  Federal  Eegister,  the  requirement  for  submitting 
information  on  weather  modification  projects  became  effective  on 
November  1,  1972.  Federal  agencies  were  excluded  from  the  require- 
ment to  submit  such  information  under  the  act;  however,  upon  mutual 
agreement  by  the  agencies  to  do  so,  data  on  Federal  projects  have  also 
been  collected  and  disseminated  by  NO  A  A  as  of  November  1, 1973. 

Appropriations  for  administering  the  provisions  of  Public  Law 
92-205  were  authorized  through  June  30,  1974,  by  the  original  law. 
Additional  authorizations  for  appropriations,  extending  the  responsi- 
bility of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  for  reporting  procedures,  were 
approved  by  the  Congress  in  two  subsequent  laws.  Public  Law  93-436 
(88  Stat.  1212)  of  October  5,  1974,  extended  reporting  requirements 
through  June  30,  1977;  while  Public  Law  94-490  (90  Stat.  2359)  of 
October  13,  1976,  contained  among  other  provisions  a  similar  exten- 
sion of  these  provisions  through  June  30, 1980.  The  major  thrust  of  the 
latter  act,  known  as  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of 
1976.  is  discussed  in  the  next  section. 

The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976 

After  consideration  of  a  number  of  bills  introduced  in  the  94th 
Congress  and  extensive  hearings  on  weather  modification,  the  Con- 
gress passed  Public  Law  94-490  (90  Stat.  2359)  ,  the  National  Weather 
Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976,  which  was  signed  October  13,  1976. 
The  following  particular  findings  prompted  the  Congress  to  take 
action : 

1.  weather-related  disasters  and  hazards,  including  drought, 
hurricanes,  tornadoes,  hail,  lightning,  fog,  floods,  and  frost,  result 


54  Public  Law  92-205  (85  Stat.  73G).  sec.  2. 
«  Ibid.,  sec.  3 


199 


in  substantial  human  suffering  and  loss  of  life,  billions  of  dollars 
of  annual  economic  losses  to  owners  of  crops  and  other  property, 
and  substantial  loss  to  the  U.S.  Treasury ; 

2.  weather  modification  technology  has  significant  potential  for 
preventing,  diverting,  moderating,  or  ameliorating  the  adverse 
effects  of  such  disasters  and  hazards  and  enhancing  crop  produc- 
tion and  the  availability  of  water; 

3.  the  interstate  nature  of  climatic  and  related  phenomena,  the 
severe  economic  hardships  experienced  as  the  result  of  occasional 
drought  and  other  adverse  meteorological  conditions,  and  the  ex- 
isting role  and  responsibilities  of  the  Federal  Government  with 
respect  to  disaster  relief,  require  appropriate  Federal  action  to 
prevent  or  alleviate  such  disasters  and  hazards ;  and 

4.  weather  modification  programs  may  have  long  range  and 
unexpected  effects  on  existing  climatic  patterns  which  are  not 
confined  by  national  boundaries.16 

By  this  act  the  Congress  proposed  "*  *  *  to  develop  a  comprehensive 
and  coordinated  national  weather  modification  policy  and  a  national 
program  of  weather  modification  research  and  development — 

1.  to  determine  the  means  by  which  deliberate  weather  modifica- 
tion can  be  used  at  the  present  time  to  decrease  the  adverse  impact 
of  weather  on  agriculture,  economic  growth,  and  the  general  pub- 
lic welfare,  and  to  determine  the  potential  for  weather  modifica- 
tion; 

2.  to  conduct  research  into  those  scientific  areas  considered  most 
likely  to  lead  to  practical  techniques  for  drought  prevention  or 
alleviation  and  other  forms  of  deliberate  weather  modification; 

3.  to  develop  practical  methods  and  devices  for  weather  modifi- 
cation ; 

4.  to  make  weather  modification  research  findings  available  to 
interested  parties ; 

5.  to  assess  the  economic,  social,  environmental,  and  legal  im- 
pact of  an  operational  weather  modification  program ; 

6.  to  develop  both  national  and  international  mechanisms  de- 
signed to  minimize  conflicts  which  may  arise  with  respect  to  the 
peaceful  uses  of  weather  modification ;  and 

7.  to  integrate  the  results  of  existing  experience  and  studies  in 
weather  modification  activities  into  model  codes  and  agreements 
for  regulation  of  domestic  and  international  weather  modification 
activities." 17 

The  act  charges  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  with  responsibility  for 
conducting  "a  comprehensive  investigation  and  study  of  the  state  of 
scientific  knowledge  concerning  weather  modification,  the  present 
state  of  development  of  weather  modification  technology,  the  problems 
impeding  effective  implementation  of  weather  modification  tech- 
nology, and  other  related  matters.  Such  study  shall  include — 

(1)  A  review  and  analysis  of  the  present  and  past  research 
efforts  to  establish  practical  weather  modification  technology, 
particularly  as  it  relates  to  reducing  loss  of  life  and  crop  and  prop- 
erty destruction  ; 

(2)  A  review  and  analysis  of  research  needs  in  weather  modifi- 
cation to  establish  areas  in  which  more  research  could  be  expected 

16  Public  Law  94-490  (90  Stat.  2359),  sec.  2,  declaration  of  policy. 

« Ibid.  _ 


200 


to,  yield  the  greatest  return  in  terms  of  practical  weather  modifi- 
cation technology ; 

(3)  A  review  and  analysis  of  existing  studies  to  establish  the 
probable  economic  importance  to  the  United  States  in  terms  of 
agricultural  production,  energy,  and  related  economic  factors 
if  the  present  weather  modification  technology  were  to  be  effec- 
tively implemented ; 

(4)  An  assessment  of  the  legal,  social,  and  ecological  implica- 
tions of  expanded  and  effective  research  and  operational  weather 
modification  projects ; 

(5)  Formation  of  one  or  more  options  for  a  model  regulatory 
code  for  domestic  weather  modification  activities,  such  code  to  be 
based  on  a  review  and  analysis  of  experience  and  studies  in  this 
area,  and  to  be  adaptable  to  State  and  national  needs ; 

(6)  Recommendations  concerning  legislation  desirable  at  all 
levels  of  government  to  implement  a  national  weather  modifica- 
tion policy  and  program ; 

(7)  A  review  of  the  international  importance  and  implications 
of  weather  modification  activities  by  the  United  States ; 

(8)  A  review  and  analysis  of  present  and  past  funding  for 
weather  modification  from  all  sources  to  determine  the  sources 
and  adequacy  of  funding  in  the  light  of  the  needs  of  the  Nation  ; 

(9)  A  review  and  analysis  of  the  purpose,  policy,  methods,  and 
funding  of  the  Federal  departments  and  agencies  involved  in 
weather  modification  and  of  the  existing  interagency  coordination 
of  weather  modification  research  efforts ; 

(10)  A  review  and  analysis  of  the  necessity  and  feasibility  of 
negotiating  an  international  agreement  concerning  the  peaceful 
uses  of  weather  modification ;  and 

(11)  Formulation  of  one  or  more  options  for  a  model  interna- 
tional agreement  concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modifi- 
cation and  the  regulation  of  national  weather  modification-activ- 
ities ;  and  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  necessity  and  feasibility  of 
negotiating  such  an  agreement.18 

The  act  directs  each  department  and  agency  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment to  furnish  pertinent  information  to  the  Secretary  of  Com- 
merce and  authorizes  the  Secretary  in  conducting  the  study  to  "solicit 
and  consider  the  views  of  State  agencies,  private  firms,  institutions 
of  higher  learning,  and  other  interested  persons  and  governmental 
entities/' 19 

A  final  report  on  the  findings,  conclusions,  and  recommendations  of 
the  required  study  is  to  be  prepared  by  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and 
submitted  to  the  President  and  the  Congress.  The  report  is  to  include 
the  following : 

(1)  A  summary  of  the  findings  made  with  respect  to  each  of  the 
areas  of  investigation  delineated  above ; 

(2)  Other  findings  which  are  pertinent  to  the  determination 
and  implementation  of  a  national  policy  on  weather  modification; 

(3)  A  recommended  national  policy  on  weather  modification 
and  a  recommended  national  weather  modification  research  and 
development  program,  consistent  with,  and  likely  to  contribute  to, 
achieving  the  objectives  of  such  policy; 


™  Ibid.,  spc.  4.  itady. 
18  Ibid.,  sec.  5,  report. 


201 


(4)  Recommendations  for  levels  of  Federal  funding  sufficient  to 
support  adequately  a  national  weather  modification  research  and 
development  program ; 

(5)  Recommendations  for  any  changes  in  the  organization  and 
involvement  of  Federal  departments  and  agencies  in  weather 
modification  which  may  be  needed  to  implement  effectively  the 
recommended  national  policy  on  weather  modification  and  the 
recommended  research  and  development  program ;  and 

(6)  Recommendations  for  any  regulatory  and  other  legislation 
which  may  be  required  to  implement  such  policy  and  program  or 
for  any  international  agreement  which  may  be  appropriate  con- 
cerning the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modification,  including 
recommendations  concerning  the  dissemination,  refinement,  and 
possible  implementation  of  the  model  domestic  code  and  inter- 
national agreement  developed  under  the  specification  in  the  list  of 
investigations  above.20 

The  act  stipulated  that  the  report  was  to  be  submitted  by  the  Secre- 
tary within  1  year  after  the  date  of  enactment  of  the  law ;  that  is,  by 
October  13,  1977.  Following  a  request  by  the  Secretary  in  June  of 
1977  for  an  extension  of  this  time  allotment,  a  Senate  bill  was  intro- 
duced, providing  for  an  extension  of  the  due  date  of  the  report  through 
June  13,  1978.  No  other  action  on  this  request  was  taken,  however, 
during  the  first  session  of  the  95th  Congress.  Meanwhile,  the  study 
mandated  by  Public  Law  9J-490  continues  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Secretary  of  Commerce.21 

Congressional  direction  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation 

Of  special  interest  as  they  have  affected  the  weather  modification 
activities  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  within  the  Department  of  the 
Interior  are  some  laws  not  specifically  concerned  with  weather  modi- 
fication as  are  the  ones  discussed  above.  The  Reclamation  Act  of  June 
17,  1902,22  directs  the  Bureau  to  develop  water  resources  for  reclama- 
tion purposes,  establishing  a  "reclamation  fund,''  which  may  be  used, 
inter  alia,  "in  the  examination  and  survey  and  for  the  construction  and 
maintenance  of  irrigation  works  for  the  storage,  diversion,  and  devel- 
opment of  waters  for  the  reclamation  of  arid  and  semiarid  lands  *  *  *" 
throughout  the  17  contiguous  Western  States  and  Hawaii.  The  author- 
ity of  the  1902  act  was  supplemented  by  the  Fact  Finders  Act  of 
December  5,  1924,  and  amendments  thereto  in  the  act  of  April  19, 
1945,23  which  enabled  the  Bureau  to  conduct  "general  investigations," 
not  related  to  specific  projects,  including  research  work,  for  the  devel- 
opment of  water  resources  without  the  necessity  of  making  the  costs 
thereof  reimbursable. 

Thus,  the  1902  Reclamation  Act,  supplemented  by  the  Fact  Finders 
Act,  provides  the  authority  for  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  to  engage 
in  a  program  of  weather  modification  research  for  the  purpose  of  de- 
termining practical  methods  of  inducing  precipitation  and  increased 
runoff  that  can  be  stored  in  surface  reservoirs  and  used  for  "the  rec- 

» Ibid. 

21  This  study  is  underway  on  behalf  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  by  a  Weather  Modifica- 
tion Advisory  Board,  appointed  by  the  Secretary.  See  subsequent  discussion  of  activities  of 
the  Advisorv  Board,  beginning  p.  231. 

M  43  U.S.C.  391  et  seq. 

»  43  U.S.C.  377. 


202 


lamation  of  arid  and  semiarid  lands/'  Funds  appropriated  for  weather 
modification  research  are  considered  expendable  on  a  nonreimbursable 
basis.24 

In  1961  the  Congress  specifically  directed  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation 
to  initiate  a  program  in  weather  modification  through  a  write-in  of 
$100,000  to  the  fiscal  year  190:2  Public  Works  Appropriation  Act.  This 
first  appropriation  for  the  Bureau's  weather  modification  research 
and  development  program  was  added  to  the  Appropriation  Act,  Public 
Law  87-330  (75  Stat.  722).  approved  September  30,  19(31.  in  a  con- 
gressional committee  of  conference,  under  the  heading,  "General  In- 
vestigations.'' 25  The  specific  language  which  directed  the  weather  mod- 
ification research  appeared  in  the  Senate  report  on  H.E.  9076,26  and 
the  provision  was  incorporated  into  the  conference  report  without 
mentioning  weather  modification  per  se.  The  Senate  report  included 
the  following  item : 

Increased  rainfall  by  cloud  seeding,  $100.000. — The  committee  recommends  al- 
lowance of  $100,000  to  be  used  for  research  on  increasing  rainfall  by  cloud  seed- 
ing. This  amount  would  be  utilized  in  cooperation  with  the  National  Science 
Foundation  and  the  Weather  Bureau,  which  are  expected  to  contribute  funds 
and  participate  in  this  research.27 

In  accordance  with  congressional  direction  in  the  fiscal  year  1962 
Public  Works  appropriation  bill,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  estab- 
lished the  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management  Program 
(^Project  Sky  water')  in  1962.  Since  the  start  of  this  program  con- 
gressional direction  has  continued  to  be  almost  entirely  through  pro- 
visions in  the  congressional  documents  relative  to  annual  Public  Works 
appropriations.  Appendix  J  is  a  summary  of  the  appropriation  lan- 
guage contained  in  these  documents  from  1961  through  1977,  which 
provided  such  direction.  It  may  be  noted  that  by  this  means  the  Con- 
gress has  continued  to  provide  specific  direction  to  this  program  al- 
most every  year  since  its  inception  and  has  provided  frequent  funding 
increases,  often  substantial,  over  levels  budgeted  by  the  administration. 

Legislation  providing  for  temporary  authorities  to  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior  to  facilitate  emergency  actions  to  mitigate  impacts  of  the 
1976-77  drought  was  enacted  by  the  Congress  and  signed  by  President 
Carter  on  April  7,  1977.  Public  Law  95-18  (91  Stat.  36) ,  subsequently 
amended  by  Public  Law  95-107  (91  Stat.  870) ,  of  August  17, 1977,  pro- 
vided authority  to  appropriate  $100  million  for  a  program  including 
short-term  actions  to  increase  water  supplies,  to  improve  water  supply 
facilities,  and  to  establish  a  bank  of  available  water  for  redistribution. 
The  Bureau  of  Reclamation  published  rules  in  the  Federal  Register 
whereby  States  could  apply  for  nonreimbursable  funds  for  actions 
designed  to  augment  water  supplies.28  Under  these  provisions,  requests 
for  funds  to  support  weather  modification  activities  were  received  from 
six  States.21* 

Justus.  John  R.  and  Robert  E  .Morrison,  legislative  authority  for  atmosphere  research 
by  Federal  agencips,  tbe  Library  of  Congress,  Congressional  Research  Service,  Apr.  1,  11*77 
( unpublished),  p.  12. 

20  U.S.  Congress,  committee  of  eonferenee.  public  works  appropriation  bill.  1902;  confer- 
ence report  to  accompany  II. R.  9076.  Washington.  D.C..  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office, 
1961,  p.  24.  (87th  Cong.,  ist  sess.  House  Rept.  No.  S7-126S.) 

26  U.S.  Congress,  Senate,  Committee  on  Appropriations,  public  works  appropriation  bill, 
1962  ;  report  to  accompany  II. R.  9076.  Washington.  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Oltice, 
1961.  p.  i>4.  (S7th  Cong..  1st  sess.  Ho.ise  Rept.  No.  87-1268.) 

■»  Ibid. 

I  -  eral  Register,  vol.  42,  No.  72.  Thursday.  Apr.  14.  1977.  pp.  19609-19613. 
20  The  States  were  California.  Colorado.  Kansas.  Nevada,  North  Dakota,  and  Utah.  ?ee 
discussion  of  the  Department  of  the  Interior  activities  in  weather  mod  iri  cat  ion.  p.  267.  for 
amounts  of  these  grants. 


203 


PROPOSED  FEDERAL  LEGISLATION  ON  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

Summary 

Since  1947  at  least  110  bills  and  22  resolutions  dealing  specifically 
with  one  or  more  aspects  of  weather  modification  have  been  introduced 
in  the  Congress.  Moreover,  many  additional  pieces  of  proposed  legis- 
lation, providing  authorization  or  appropriations  for  broader  agency 
programs,  have  given  support  and/or  direction  to  weather  modification 
activities  within  Federal  agencies,  often  without  mentioning  such 
activities  per  se. 

Table  1  summarizes  the  legislation  and  resolutions  concerned  specifi- 
cally with  weather  modification,  which  were  proposed  from  the  first 
session  of  the  80th  Congress  to  the  first  session  of  the  95th  Congress. 
The  table  shows,  for  each  session,  the  numbers  of  bills  and  resolutions 
pertaining  to  each  of  several  aspects  of  the  subject  and  the  total  number 
of  each  introduced.  The  numbers  appearing  under  the  several  subjects 
of  weather  modification  legislation  will,  in  general,  exceed  the  total 
number  of  measures  introduced  in  a  given  year  because  many  of  the 
bills  were  concerned  with  more  than  one  aspect.  It  will  be  noted  that  a 
total  of  six  laws  were  passed  during  this  period,  as  stated  earlier.  Dur- 
ing the  93d  Congress  the  Senate  also  passed  one  resolution,  which  sup- 
ported the  position  that  the  United  States  should  seek  the  agreement 
of  other  nations  to  a  treaty  banning  environmental  modification  as  a 
weapon  of  war. 


204 


ec  o  ■ 

OIL' 

OS 


J,  »  <D 
g  «  o>  «j  o  5  £ 


«S°  2^ 


■5  ra  2  «  c 
o  a  g  t>.=  : 

Q.  5 


IS® 


o   <->  >>  t   ™  O. 

o 


4>  .2  o  c  = 
■^E  =  °2 


cs  O 

:n  o 
«  53 


lo  E  re 
a>  y 


co  o  w  c 
O  to  5-2 

«9  O 


J3  »  O  B 
o  -CI  W  o 

t—  E  S= 
=  o 


2  o 


•  —  cni  cm  en  cm  • 


*— '  LT>  OO  CM  CM 


— •  CNI  — '  CVJ  — iCNJ— ■CNI— •  CM  -~  CM  • 

■£  £  £        £  £  £  £  £  £  s 


i  CD  CD  CD  ( 


•  LO  to  r-»  OO  CD 


OOOOCOOOOTCOaO»OOC7)OT  CD 

cm  n     m  vp  p-  ~ 
<5< 

CD  CD  C 


oocdo  —  csiro>o-u-)tor 
I  cD  cD  cd  r — ■  r**.  r —  r —  r**.  f-*  r-»  r 


205 


It  can  be  seen  from  the  table  that  congressional  activity  has  often 
evolved  in  accordance  with  the  emergence  of  various  interests  and 
issues.  Thus,  in  the  1950's  and  1960's  there  were  strong  attempts  to 
initiate  and  support  Federal  research  and/or  operational  programs, 
usually  within  one  or  another  of  several  specified  departments  or  agen- 
cies. From  time  to  time  emphasis  has  been  given  to  evaluating  weather 
modification  technology  and  establishing  a  national  policy,  usually 
:  through  mandating  an  in-depth  study ;  such  study  was  sometimes  to  be 
undertaken  by  a  select  committee  established  for  that  purpose.  In  the 
1970*3  two  thrusts  in  proposed  legislation  have  dealt  with  regulating 
and  or  licensing  of  operations  and  with  reporting  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  to  the  Federal  Government,  both  reflecting  increased 
concern  on  the  part  of  large  segments  of  the  public  about  unknown 
effects  of  such  operations  and  about  legal  and  economic  ramifications 
of  increased  or  decreased  precipitation.  Obvious  too  in  the  1970's  is  the 
reaction  of  Congress  to  public  concern  about  the  use  of  weather  modi- 
fication as  a  weapon,  as  18  resolutions  dealing  with  that  subject  were 
introduced  in  both  Houses  since  1971. 

Specific  measures  of  recent  years  on  weather  modification,  those 
introduced  in  the  94th  Congress  and  the  first  session  of  the  95th  Con- 
gress, are  summarized  in  the  following  section. 

Legislation  proposed  in  the  9J/.th  and  95th  Congress,  1st  session 

Proposed  legislation  and  resolutions  appearing  during  the  94th  Con- 
gress reflected  concern  over  many  current  problem  areas  in  weather 
modification  coming  into  focus  today,  areas  over  which  it  is  considered 
by  many  that  the  Federal  Government  should  have  some  jurisdiction. 
Based  upon  a  number  of  specific  measures  introduced  during  that  Con- 
gress and  the  ensuing  discussions  thereon,  there  emerged  the  National 
Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976  (Public  Law  94-490),  which 
could  be  a  landmark,  in  that  studies  and  decisions  pursuant  to  that  act 
may  lead  to  definition  of  a  clear  Federal  policy  for  the  first  time  in 
recent  years.  The  bills  submitted  thus  far  in  the  95th  Congress  address 
some  concerns  not  dealt  with  in  the  recent  law  and  may  presage  stipula- 
tions which  could  conceivably  be  incorporated  into  future  Federal  pol- 
icy. Undoubtedly,  the  96th  Congress  will  see  a  greater  abundance  of 
proposed  legislation  dealing  with  Federal  policy  on  weather  modifica- 
tion, following  receipt  by  the  Congress  of  the  report  from  the  Secre- 
tary of  Commerce  recommending  a  national  policy  and  a  program  of 
Federal  research  and  development.30  Measures  introduced  during  the 
94th  Congress  and  the  first  session  of  the  95th  Congress  are  summarized 
below : 

9ifh  Congress,  1st  session 

S.  2705. — To  provide  for  a  study,  within  the  Department  of 
Commerce,  by  a  National  Weather  Modification  Commission,  of 
the  research  needs  for  weather  modification,  the  status  of  current 
technologies,  the  extent  of  coordination,  and  the  appropriate 
responsibility  for  operations  in  the  field  of  weather  modification. 
(Hearing  was  held  Feb.  17, 1976.) 

S.  2706. — To  authorize  and  direct  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to 
plan  and  carry  out  a  10-year  experimental  research  program  to 

SP  Public  Law  94-490  directs  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  conduct  a  study  on  weather 
modification  and  to  submit  a  report  to  the  President  and  the  Congress,  recommending  a  na- 
tional policy  and  a  program  of  Federal  research  and  development  in  weather  modification. 

34-857—79  16 


206 


determine  the  feasibility  of  and  the  most  effective  methods  for 
drought  prevention  by  weather  modification.  Directs  the  Secre- 
tary to  appoint  an  Advisory  Board  and  provides  for  consulta- 
tion with  State  and  local  governments  starting  weather  modifica- 
tion efforts  for  drought  alleviation.  (Hearing  was  held  Feb.  17, 
1976.) 

S.  2707. — To  authorize  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  carry  out 
a  program  of  assistance  to  States  in  preventing  and  alleviating 
drought  emergencies.  (Hearing  was  held  Feb.  17, 1976.) 

H.R.  167. — To  prohibit  the  United  States  from  engaging  in 
weather  modification  activities,  including  cloud  seeding  and  fire 
storms,  for  military  purposes.  (No  action.) 

H.R.  274-2. — Directed  the  Secretaries  of  Agriculture  and  Inte- 
rior to  permit  the  conduct  of  weather  modification  activities,  in- 
cluding both  atmospheric  and  surface  activities  and  environ- 
mental research,  which  are  over,  or  may  affect,  areas  which  are 
part  of  the  National  Wilderness  Preservation  System  or  other 
Federal  lands.  Authorized  the  respective  Secretaries  to  prescribe 
such  operating  and  monitoring  conditions  as  each  deems  neces- 
sary to  minimize  or  avoid  long-term  and  intensive  local  impact 
on  the  wilderness  character  of  the  areas  affected.  (No  action.) 

H.R.  4325. — Weather  Modification  and  Precipitation  Manage- 
ment Act.  Authorized  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  establish 
precipitation  management  projects  in  order  to  augment  U.S. 
usable  water  resources.  Authorized  the  Secretary  to  engage  in 
operational  demonstration  projects  for  potential  use  in  precipita- 
tion management  programs  in  certain  States  and  to  settle  and 
pay  claims  against  the  United  States  for  injury,  death,  or  losses 
resulting  from  weather  modification  pursuant  to  provisions  of 
this  act.  (No  action.) 

H.R.  4338. — Designated  specific  lands  within  the  Sequoia  and 
Sierra  National  Forests,  Calif.,  as  the  "Monarch  Wilderness," 
abolishing  the  previous  classification  of  the  "High  Sierra  Primi- 
tive Area."  Directed  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  to  authorize  use 
of  hydrological  devices  and  to  provide  for  weather  modification 
activities  within  such  wilderness.  (No  action.) 

H.R.  10039. — Weather  Modification  Research,  Development,  and 
Control  Act  of  1975.  Directed  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  es- 
tablish a  weather  modification  research  and  development  pro- 
gram to  evaluate  the  specific  needs  and  uses  of  weather  modifi- 
cation and  directed  the  Secretary  to  establish  a  weather  modifica- 
tion information  system.  Prohibited  individuals  from  engaging 
in  weather  modification  activities  without  obtaining  a  permit  from 
the  Secretary  and  authorized  the  President  to  enter  into  inter- 
national agreements  to  foster  establishment  of  international  sys- 
tems for  monitoring  and  regulation  of  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities. (Joint  hearings  were  held  on  H.R.  10039  and  S.  3383, 
June  15-18, 1976 ;  no  further  action  on  H.R,  10039.) 

77.  Res,  28. — Expressed  the  sense  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives that  the  U.S.  Government  should  seek  agreement  with 
ot  her  members  of  the  United  Nations  on  the  prohibition  of  weather 


207 


modification  as  a  weapon  of  war.  (Hearing  was  held  July  29, 1975 ; 
no  further  action.) 

H.  Res.  103.— Same  as  H.  Res.  28.  (No  action.) 

94th  Congress,  2d  Session 

S.  3383.— National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act.  Directed 
the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  conduct  a  comprehensive  study  of 
scientific  knowledge  concerning  weather  modification  and  tech- 
nology of  weather  modification.  Required  the  Secretary  to  prepare 
and  submit  to  the  President  and  the  Congress  a  final  report  on 
the  findings  and  conclusions  of  such  study,  including  a  recom- 
mended national  policy  on  weather  modification.  Extended 
through  fiscal  year  1980  appropriation  authorization  for  the 
weather  modification  activities  oversight  program  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce.  (Reported  to  Senate,  May  13,  1976,  in  lieu 
of  S.  2705,  S.  2706,  and  S.  2707;  considered  and  passed  by  Sen- 
ate, May  21,  1976;  hearings  held  jointly  in  House  subcommittee 
on  S.  3383  and  H.R.  10039,  June  15-18, 1976 ;  called  up  under  mo- 
tion to  suspend  the  rules,  considered,  and  passed  by  the  House, 
amended,  Sept.  20,  1976;  Senate  agreed  to  House  amendments, 
Sept.  28,  1976;  and  approved  as  Public  Law  94-490,  Oct.  13, 
1976.) 

H.R.  14S '44- — Extended  through  fiscal  year  1980  appropriations 
authorization  for  the  weather  modification  activities  oversight 
program  of  the  Department  of  Commerce.  ( No  action. ) 

95th  Congress,  1st  Session 

S.  1938.— To  extend  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy 
Act  of  1976  by  extending  the  date  for  submission  of  the  required 
report  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  June  13, 1978.  (No  action.) 

H.R.  4069.— Weather  Modification  Regulation  Act  of  1977: 
Requires  weather  modification  licenses  and  permits,  establishes 
reporting  requirements  to  be  administered  by  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce,  and  requires  the  Secretary  to  establish  a  weather  mod- 
ification information  system.  Authorizes  the  President  to  enter 
into  international  agreements  to  foster  establishment  of  interna- 
tional systems  for  monitoring  and  regulation  of  weather  modifica- 
tion activities.  (No  action.) 

H.R.  4461—  Same  as  H.R.  2742,  introduced  during  94th  Con- 
gress, first  session.  (No  action.) 

H.  Res.  236. — Declares  it  to  be  the  sense  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives that  the  United  States  should  seek  an  agreement  with 
other  members  of  the  United  Nations  to  prohibit  research,  experi- 
mentation, or  the  use  of  weather  modification  as  a  weapon.  (No 
action.)  31 

OTHER  CONGRESSIONAL  ACTIVITIES 

Resolutions  on  toeather  modification 

As  noted  earlier,  some  22  resolutions  related  to  weather  modification 
have  been  introduced  over  the  past  30  years  in  both  Houses  of  the 
Congress.  For  convenience,  data  on  these  resolutions  are  included  along 
witli  that  on  proposed  legislation  in  table  1  and  in  the  discussion 


31  See  ch.  10  for  a  discussion  of  the  development  of  6uch  a  U.N.  convention,  opened  for 
signature  in  Geneva,  May  18.  1977. 


208 


thereon,  and  three  resolutions  are  included  in  the  preceding  list  of 
summaries  of  weather  modification  bills  appearing  during  the  94th 
and  95th  Congresses. 

By  far,  the  largest  number  of  weather  modification  resolutions,  18 
in  all,  have  been  concerned  with  barring  the  use  of  weather  modifica- 
tion as  a  weapon  of  war.  Introduction  of  such  resolutions  began  during 
the  92d  Congress  in  1971,  and,  using  similar  language,  they  express 
the  sense  of  either  House  or  of  the  Congress  that  the  United  States 
should  seek  an  agreement  with  other  U.1\T.  members,  prohibiting  such 
use  of  environmental  modification,  including  weather  modification.  In 
1973.  the  Senate  passed  S.  Res.  71,  which  had  been  intro- 
duced by  Senator  Claiborne  Pell.  This  and  other  resolutions  urging 
prohibition  of  environmental  modification  for  purposes  of  warfare 
were  prompted  by  a  series  of  hearings  and  communications  between 
Senator  Pell  and  the  Department  of  Defense  on  the  alleged  use  of 
weather  modification  technology  as  a  weapon  in  Vietnam  by  U.S.  mili- 
tary forces.32 

Four  other  weather  modification  resolutions,  introduced  in  the  1950's 
and  1960?s,  pertained  to  the  undertaking  of  comprehensive  studies  on 
the  subject,  either  by  special  committees  to  be  established  by  the  Con- 
gress or  by  departments  and/or  agencies  of  the  executive  branch. 

Hearings 

Cognizant  subcommittees  of  both  Houses  have  conducted  hearings 
concerned,  at  least  in  part,  with  Federal  weather  modification  activi- 
ties, from  time  to  time  and  annually,  in  connection  with  oversight  of 
agency  programs,  authorizing  legislation,  and  annual  appropriations. 
In  addition,  more  comprehensive  hearings  on  the  subject  have  been 
important  parts  of  the  legislative  activities  leading  to  passage  of  the 
major  public  laws  on  weather  modification,  which  have  been  enacted 
since  1953. 

Of  particular  interest  in  recent  years  are  the  extensive  hearings  con- 
ducted during  1976  by  the  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere 
of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Commerce  33  and  by  the  Subcommittee  on 
the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere  of  the  House  Committee  on 
Science  and  Technology.34  The  documents  produced  from  these  hear- 
ings contain  the  testimony  of  a  number  of  expert  witnesses  on  various 
aspects  of  weather  modification  as  well  as  reproductions  of  numerous 
pertinent  documents  which  were  incorporated  into  the  records  of  the 
hearings.  References  to  documents  on  other  weather  modification  hear- 
ings conducted  in  recent  years  are  contained  in  the  bibliography  of 
congressional  publications  in  appendix  H. 

On  October  26, 1977,  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the 
Atmosphere  of  the  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology  con- 
ducted a  special  hearing  on  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy 
Act  of  1976  (Public  Law  94^90) .  Among  other  witnesses,  Mr.  Harlan 
Cleveland.  Chairman  of  the  Commerce  Department's  Weather  Modi- 

-'  The  correspondence  and  hearings  on  the  use  of  weather  modification  as  a  weapon  in 
Vietnam  and  of  the  development  of  a  U.N.  treaty  barring  environmental  modification  in  war- 
far*  are  discussed  among  other  international  aspects  of  weather  modification  in  ch.  10. 

"';  U.S.  Congress,  Senate.  Committee  on  Commerce.  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and  Atmos- 
phere. Atmospheric  Research  Control  Act.  hearing.  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  on  S.  2705.  S.  2706, 
and  S  2707.  Feb.  17.  1976,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1976.  297  pp. 

M  TVS.  Congress.  House,  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee  on  the  En- 
vironment and  the  Atmosphere.  Weather  modification,  hearings,  94th  Cong..  2d  sess..  on 
TT  i:  ino?,f>  and  S.  3383,  June  15-18,  1976,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office, 
1976,  524  pp. 


209 


fication  Advisory  Board,  briefed  the  subcommittee  on  progress  of  the 
Board  in  carrying  out  for  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  the  comprehen- 
sive study  required  by  the  act  and  also  reported  on  findings  of  the 
Board  to  date  in  a  discussion  paper  which  he  submitted  for  the  record.33 

Studies  and  reports  by  congressional  support  agencies 

In  addition  to  the  studies  and  reports  of  the  executive  branch  which 
were  mandated  by  the  Congress  through  legislation,  studies  have  also 
been  undertaken  on  behalf  of  the  Congress  by  congressional  support 
agencies  on  at  least  three  occasions.  The  present  report,  requested  in 
1976  by  the  Senate  Committee  on  Commerce,  was  preceded  by  a  similar 
study  and  report  requested  a  decade  earlier  by  the  same  committee.36 
In  1974,  the  General  Accounting  Office  (GAO)  conducted  a  critical 
review  of  ongoing  Federal  research  programs  in  weather  modification 
and  prepared  a  report  to  the  Congress  on  the  need  for  a  national  pro- 
gram.37 A  discussion  of  the  findings  and  recommendations  of  this  GAO 
study,  along  with  those  of  other  major  Government  and  non-Govern- 
ment studies,  is  undertaken  in  a  later  chapter  of  this  report.3S 

Activities  of  the  Executive  Branch 
introduction 

The  executive  branch  of  the  Federal  Government  sponsors  nearly 
all  of  the  weather  modification  research  projects  in  the  United  States, 
under  a  variety  of  programs  scattered  through  at  least  six  departments 
and  agencies.  The  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  for  19 7S  39 
includes  information  on  specific  programs  of  the  Departments  of  Agri- 
culture, Commerce,  Defense,  and  the  Interior  and  of  the  Energy  Re- 
search and  Development  Administration  (now  part  of  the  Department 
of  Energy)  and  the  National  Science  Foundation.  In  recent  years 
weather  modification  research  programs  were  also  identified  by  the  De- 
partment of  Transportation  and  the  National  Aeronautics  and  Space 
Administration. 

In  addition  to  specific  programs  sponsored  by  Federal  agencies,  there 
are  other  functions  relevant  to  weather  modification  which  are  per- 
formed in  several  places  in  the  structure  of  the  executive  branch.  Vari- 
ous Federal  advisory  panels  and  committees  and  their  staffs,  which 
have  been  established  to  conduct  in-dep>th  studies  and  prepare  compre- 
hensive reports,  to  provide  advice  and  recommendations,  or  to  coordi- 

35  Cleveland.  Harlan,  "A  U.S.  Policy  To  Enhance  the  Atmospheric  Environment."  A  dis- 
cussion paper  by  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Oct.  21,  1977.  Submitted  as  part 
of  testimonv  in  hearing:  U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives,  Committee  on  Science 
and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  "Weather  Modi- 
fication." 95th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  Oct.  26,  1977,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing 
Office,  1977,  pp.  2-49. 

36  U.S.  Library  of  Congress,  Legislative  Reference  Service,  "Weather  Modification  and  Con- 
trol," a  report  prepared  by  Lawton  M.  Hartman  and  others  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on 
Commerce.  U.S.  Senate,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Apr.  27,  1966, 
181  pp.  (89th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  Senate  Rept.  No.  1139.) 

87  Comptroller  General  of  the  United  States,  "Need  for  a  National  Weather  Modification 
Research  Program,"  report  to  the  Congress,  U.S.  General  Accounting  Office,  Washington, 
B.C.,  Aug.  23,  1974,  71  pp. 

38  See  eh.  6.  p.  324. 

39  The  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program,  including  the  Federal  program  in  weather 
modification,  is  published  annually  in  a  report  of  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for 
Atmospheric  Sciences.  The  most  recent  such  report,  containing  a  discussion  of  and  funding 
for  the  fiscal  year  1978  program  is  the  following  :  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science, 
Engineering,  and  Technology.  Committee  on  Atmosphere  and  Oceans,  Interdepartmental 
Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences.  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program,  fiscal  year 
1978,  ICAS  21-FY78,  September  1977,  pp.  87-94. 


210 


hale  Federal  weather  modification  programs  have  been  housed  and 
supported  within  executive  departments,  agencies,  or  offices.  For  exam- 
ple, the  National  Advk^iy  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere 
(XACOA)  and  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  are  sup- 
ported through  the  Department  of  Commerce.  While  the  membership 
of  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences 
(ICAS)  comes  from  each  of  the  Federal  departments  and  agencies 
with  atmospheric  science  programs,  its  staff  has  been  housed  in  the 
National  Science  Foundation. 

The  program  whereby  Federal  and  non-Federal  U.S.  weather  mod- 
ification activities  are  reported  to  the  Federal  Government  is  adminis- 
tered by  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
(XOAA)  within  the  Department  of  Commerce.  Under  this  program  a 
central  file  is  maintained  on  all  such  projects  in  the  United  States, 
and  summary  reports  on  these  projects  are  published  on  a  nearly 
annual  basis  by  NOAA. 

The  United  States  has  been  active  in  at  least  two  areas  of  interna- 
tional interest  in  weather  modification.  One  aspect  has  been  the  efforts 
through  the  United  Nations  to  promote  the  adoption  of  a  treaty  bar- 
ring weather  modification  as  a  military  weapon.  There  is  also  a  U.S. 
interest  in  international  efforts  to  modify  the  environment  for  bene- 
ficial purposes.  The  State  Department  is  active  in  negotiating  agree- 
ments with  other  countries  which  might  be  affected  by  U.S.  experiments 
and  has  also  arranged  for  Federal  agencies  and  other  U.S.  investiga- 
tors for  participation  in  international  meterological  projects,  includ- 
ing weather  modification,  under  the  World  Meteorological  Organiza- 
tion (WMO).  These  activities  are  discussed  in  more  detail  in  a  subse- 
quent chapter  on  international  aspects  of  weather  modification.40 

In  the  next  subsection  there  is  an  attempt  to  describe  the  Federal 
organizational  structure  for  weather  modification,  at  least  to  the  extent 
that  such  a  structure  exists,  has  existed,  or  may  exist  in  the  near 
future.  Other  subsections  address  Federal  coordination  and  advisory 
groups,  the  weather  modification  activities  reporting  program,  and 
the  array  of  Federal  studies  and  reports  which  have  been  undertaken 
by  the  executive  branch,  either  as  required  by  law  or  initiated  within 
the  branch.  A  summary  of  the  Federal  research  program  and  detailed 
descriptions  of  each  of  the  several  agencies  programs  in  weather  modi- 
fication are  contained  in  a  separate  major  section  at  the  end  of  this 
chapter.41 

INSTITUTIONAL  STRUCTURE  OF  THE  FEDERAL  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

PROGRAM 

Cum  nt  status  of  Federal  organization  for  weather  modification 

The  present  Federal  structure  of  weather  modification  research 
activities  is  characterized  esseiitially  by  the  mission-oriented  approach, 
where  each  of  six  or  seven  deportments  and  agencies  conducts  its 
own  program  in  accordance  with  broad  agency  goals  or  under  specific 
directions  from  the  Congress  or  the  Executive.  The  exception  to  this 
approach  is  the  program  of  the  Xational  Science  Foundation,  whose 
funded  weather  modification  research  activities  have  included  a  broad 


<°  Spp  en  i  o. 
11  See  p.  241  ff. 


211 


range  of  individual  fundamental  problem  investigations,  research 
supporting  some  aspects  of  the  project  of  other  Federal  agencies, 
and  conduct  of  major  projects  initiated  by  the  Foundation.  The  pro- 
grams of  the  several  agencies  have  been  loosely  coordinated  with  others 
through  various  independent  arrangements  and/or  advisory  panels 
and  particularlv  through  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  At- 
mospheric Sciences  (ICAS).  The  ICAS,  established  in  1959  by  the 
former  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  provides  advice 
on  matters  related  to  atmospheric  science  in  general  and  has  also  been 
the  principal  coordinating  mechanism  for  Federal  research  in  the 
field  of  weather  modification.  The  following  observation  on  the  cur- 
rent Federal  weather  modification  organizational  structure  was  stated 
recently  by  the  chairman  of  the  ICAS  : 

Organization [s]  doing  the  research  [should]  be  knowledgeable  of  the  sector 
of  the  public  that  is  to  be  involved  with  special  weather  modification  techniques. 
There  is  no  single  agency  within  the  Government  that  knows  all  of  the  problems 
of  society  vis-a-vis  weather  modification.  As  things  stand,  the  individual  weather 
modification  programs  being  carried  out  by  the  various  ICAS  member  agencies 
are  being  pursued  in  concert  with  the  missions  of  those  agencies.42 

The  nature  of  the  present  Federal  organizational  structure  for 
weather  modification  is  related  to  and  results  from  the  prevailing 
policy,  or  lack  of  such  policy,  currently  subscribed  to  by  the  Federal 
Government  regarding  weather  modification.  The  clearest  statement 
of  such  a  policy  came  in  a  reply  to  a  1975  letter  from  Congressmen 
Gilbert  Gude  and  Donald  M.  Fraser  and  Senator  Claiborne  Pell, 
addressed  to  the  President,  urging  that  a  coordinated  Federal  program 
in  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  be  initiated.43  In  the  official  response 
from  the  executive  branch,  written  by  Norman  E.  Ross,  Jr.,  Assistant 
Director  of  the  Domestic  Council,  the  current  Federal  weather  modifi- 
cation policy  was  affirmed : 

We  believe  that  the  agency  which  is  charged  with  the  responsibility  for  deal- 
ing with  a  particular  national  problem  should  be  given  the  latitude  to  seek 
the  best  approach  or  solution  to  the  problem.  In  some  instances  this  may  involve 
a  form  of  weather  modification,  while  in  other  instances  other  approaches  may 
be  more  appropriate. 

While  we  would  certainly  agree  that  some  level  of  coordination  of  weather 
modification  research  efforts  is  logical,  we  do  not  believe  that  a  program  under 
the  direction  of  any  one  single  agency's  leadership  is  either  necessary  or 
desirable.  We  have  found  from  our  study  that  the  types  of  scientific  research 
conducted  by  agencies  are  substantially  different  in  approach,  techniques,  and 
type  of  equipment  employed,  depending  on  the  particular  weather  phenomena 
being  addressed.  *  *  *  Each  type  of  weather  modification  requires  a  different  form 
of  program  management  and  there  are  few  common  threads  which  run  along 
all  programs.44 

Recently,  the  Chairman  of  the  Commerce  Department's  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board,  Harlan  Cleveland,  expressed  the 
Board's  opinion  of  the  current  Federal  policy  and  structure  : 

The  United  States  does  not  now  have  a  weather  modification  policy.  The 
three  main  Federal  actors  in  weather  modification  research  are  NOAA  in  the 

42  Testimony  of  Dr.  Edward  P.  Todd  In  U.S.  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Commit- 
tee on  Science  and  Teehnolosy,  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere, 
'Weather  Modification."  hearings.  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess..  June  15-18,  1976.  Washington.  D.C., 
T.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1976,  p.  81. 

43  Gude.  Gilbert.  "Weather  Modification."  Congressional  Record.  June  17.  1975,  pp.  19201- 
192f>3.  (The  statement  in  the  Congressional  Record,  including  the  letter  to  the  President 
and  the  official  reply,  are  reproduced  in  app.  A.) 

"  Ibid. 


212 


Department  of  Commerce,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  in  the  Department  of 
the  Interior,  and  the  National  Science  Foundation.  . . .  Their  combined  R  and  D 
efforts  can  only  be  described  as  fragmented  and  famished,  living  from  hand  to 
mouth  on  each  agency's  relationship  with  a  different  congressional  subcommittee, 
with  no  sense  of  a  national  policy  or  program.  .  .  .  The  agencies  that  are  involved, 
and  their  university  and  other  contractors  and  grantees,  have  developed,  despite 
the  fragmentation,  remarkably  effective  informal  relationships  which  make 
the  coordination  and  mutual  assistance  better  than  the  division  of  roles  and 
missions  would  indicate.45 

A  somewhat  different  viewpoint,  but  related  in  several  points  to  the 
preceding  opinions  w*as  expressed  in  1976  by  Dr.  Ronald  L.  Lavoie, 
Director  of  NOAA's  Environmental  Modification  Office,  addressing 
the  second  meeting  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modifi- 
cation Council : 

Let  me  address  the  question  of  current  Federal  policies  in  weather  modifi- 
cation— the  statement  has  been  made  that  there  aren't  any.  I  think  that  I  must 
disagree  with  that  statement.  There  are,  in  fact,  such  policies  although  they 
are  perhaps  unobtrusive  or  low-key.  They  certainly  aren't  propounded  very 
loudly,  but  I  think  it  is  safe  to  say  that  there  is  some  Federal  policy  on  weather 
modification.  .  .  .  For  example,  in  the  area  of  research  and  operations  the  Federal 
policy,  or  you  may  call  it  strategy,  is  to  leave  it  to  the  specialized  agencies  to 
fund  research  and  to  develop  or  apply  weather  modification  in  carrying  out  their 
particular  missions.  One  can  argue  with  this  policy ;  nevertheless,  it  does 
exist.  .  .  .  One  shouldn't  get  the  impression,  however,  that  this  is  an  entirely 
fragmented  effort.  .  .  .  There  is  some  coordination  or  integration,  at  least  in  the 
sense  that  technocrats  responsible  for  advising  the  agencies  in  these  matters  get 
together  to  discuss  issues  and  share  problems  Nevertheless,  there  is  no  Fed- 
eral or  national  commitment  to  weather  modification,  and  I  believe  that  this  is 
what  was  implied  when  it  was  said  that  there  was  no  national  policy.*8 

Yet  another  observation  on  the  subject  of  Federal  organization  is 
that  expressed  in  the  1974  report  by  the  U.S.  General  Accounting 
Office: 

Our  review  of  the  Federal  weather  modification  research  activities  supports 
the  findings  of  nearly  a  decade  of  studies.  These  studies  conducted  by  scientific 
panels,  committees,  and  other  groups  all  identified  common  problems — ineffec- 
tive coordination,  fragmented  research,  and  research  efforts  that  are  subcritical 
(funded  below  the  level  necessary  to  produce  timely,  effective  results).  Most 
studies  proposed  a  common  solution.  What  was  needed,  in  essence,  was  a 
national  research  program  under  a  single  Federal  agency  responsible  for  estab- 
lishing plans  and  priorities,  obtaining  the  needed  funds  from  the  Congress, 
managing  research  efforts,  and  accounting  for  the  results  its  programs  achieved. 

To  date,  except  for  the  establishment  of  several  coordinating  committees, 
subcommittees,  and  advisory  panels — none  of  which  have  the  authority  to  take 
action  to  correct  problems  already  identified — an  effective  overall  national 
weather  modification  research  program  has  not  been  established.47 

There  is  some  consensus  that  the  apparent  fragmentation  and  lack 
of  a  cohesive  Federal  effort  have  not  only  prevented  the  growth  of  a 
strong,  adequately  funded  research  program  but  may  have  also 
retarded  progress  in  development  of  weather  modification  technology 

45  Cleveland,  Harlan.  "A  U.S.  Policy  To  Enhance  the  Atmospheric  Environment."  A  dis- 
cussion paper  by  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Oct.  21,  1977.  (Submitted  as 
part  of  testimony  in  hearing  :  U.S.  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Committee  on  Sci- 
ence and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  "Weathel 
Modification,"  Oct.  26,  1977.  p.  41.) 

49  Lavoie,  Ronald  L..  "Effects  of  Legislation  on  Federal  Programs  and  the  Prospect  of  Fed- 
eral Involvement."  In  proceedings  of  Conference  on  Weather  Modification,  Today  and  Tomor- 
row :  second  annual  meeting  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Coun- 
cil, Kansas  City,  Mo.,  Jan.  15-16.  1976,  pub.  No.  76-1,  pp.  56-57. 

*"  Comptroller  General  of  the  United  States.  "Need  for  a  National  Weather  Modification 
Research  Program."  report  to  the  Congress.  U.S.  General  Accounting  Oftlce,  B-133202,  Wash- 
ington, D.C.,  Aug.  23,  1974,  p.  3. 


213 


itself.  Many  feel  strongly  that  assignment  of  a  "lead  agency"  would 
solidify  and  strengthen  the  Federal  effort.  To  others,  however,  "*  *  * 
the  present  structure  for  Federal  Government  activity  in  weather  mod- 
ification appears  to  be  working  satisfactorily,"  48  and  the  existence  of 
separate  agency  programs  fosters  increased  understanding  through 
independent  research  projects  and  through  the  cross- fertilization  of 
ideas  and  exchange  of  findings  achieved  in  cooperative  projects,  in 
professional  meetings,  and  through  program-level  coordination. 

In  a  recent  Federal  study  on  weather  modification,  a  subcommittee 
of  the  Domestic  Council  could  not  reach  a  consensus  on  the  proper 
institutional  structure  for  planning  and  management  of  the  national 
weather  modification  research  effort.  Consequently,  both  of  the  posi- 
tions noted  above  were  identified  as  options  for  such  Federal 
structure : 49 

Option  (1)  :  Continue  coordination  and  planning  of  the  national 
weather  modification  effort  through  the  Interdepartmental  Committee 
for  Atmospheric  Sciences  of  the  Federal  Council  for  Science  and 
Technology,  with  individual  agencies  pursuing  their  mission  responsi- 
bilities. 

Option  (2)  :  Establish  a  lead  agency  to  foster  the  broad  advance- 
ment of  the  science  and  technology  of  weather  modification  as 
recommended  by  the  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and 
Atmosphere,  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  and  other  groups  to 
coordinate  and  plan  the  national  effort  with  the  assistance  and  partici- 
pation of  other  agencies. 

Those  who  espouse  the  latter  position  feel  that  the  lead  agency 
responsibility  should  include  the  following  functions : 50 

The  lead  agency  would  assume  the  leadership  for  planning  the 
Federal  weather  modification  program,  in  concert  with  those  other 
concerned  agencies,  universities,  and  the  private  sector. 

The  lead  agency  would  present,  within  the  executive  branch,  a 
consolidated  national  weather  modification  research  plan  and  be 
available  to  represent  the  national  plan  before  the  Congress. 

The  lead  agency  would,  within  the  framework  of  the  joint  plan- 
ning effort,  encourage  and  assist  in  justifying  programmatic  ac- 
tivities in  other  agencies  that  might  contribute  significantly  to  the 
national  weather  modification  objectives,  especially  when  those 
programs  can  be  implemented  as  supplements  to  the  agencies' 
ongoing  mission-related  activities. 

The  lead  agency  would  take  on  the  responsibility  for  presenting 
the  budgetary  requirements  to  carry  out  the  national  plan  to  the 
Office  of  Management  and  Budget  and,  with  due  consideration  of 
overall  priorities  of  the  agency,  would  seek  to  provide  within  its 
own  budget  for  activities  essential  to  the  national  plan  and  not 
incorporated  in  the  budgets  of  the  other  agencies. 
The  history  of  the  organization  of  the  Federal  program  in  weather 
modification,  to  the  extent  that  such  a  structure  has  existed,  can  be 

4*  Testimony  of  Dr.  Alfred  J.  Esgers.  Jr..  Assistant  Director  for  Research  Applications, 
National  Science  Foundation  in  U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives.  Committee  on 
Seienr-e  and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  "Weather 
Modification. "  v>earin£s.  04th  Consr..  2d  sess.,  June  15-1S,  1976,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Gov- 
ernment Printing:  Office.  1976.  p.  109. 

49  U.S.  Domestic  Council.  Environmental  Resources  Committee.  Subcommittee  on  Climate 
Change,  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification."  Washington,  D.C,  December  1975, 
p.  19. 

60  Ibid.,  app.  A,  pp.  A-2  and  A-3. 


214 


conveniently  divided  into  three  periods,  each  roughly  a  decade  long. 
These  periods  and  the  characteristics  of  the  Federal  organization  dur- 
ing each  are  discussed  briefly  below. 

Federal  structure;  194-6-57 

As  seen  in  the  earlier  historical  account  of  weather  modification,  in 
the  period  from  1946  through  1957  practically  all  projects  in  the 
United  States  were  conducted  by  private  individuals  and  by  industry 
supported  through  private  funds.  What  activities  the  U.S.  agencies 
did  support  were  both  mission  oriented  and  mostly  uncoordinated.  The 
Defense  Department  developed  an  early  research  program,  specifically 
in  seeding  technology  and  hardware.  Since  World  War  II,  the  Air 
Force  had  a  continuing  need  to  dissipate  fog,  and  the  Korean  war  and 
SAC  missions  during  this  period  required  airports  to  be  open  to  permit 
unrestricted  flights.  The  Navy  developed  a  strong  research  capability 
at  its  China  Lake,  Calif.,  laboratory,  concentrating  on  seeding  de- 
vices and  materials.  Project  Cirrus,  a  joint  project  of  the  Army  Signal 
Corps,  the  Navy,  and  the  Air  Force,  was  initiated  by  the  Defense 
Department  in  1947  and  continued  through  1952. 

Civilian  implications  for  weather  modification  were  investigated 
by  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau  of  the  Commerce  Department  in  1948  as 
part  of  its  cloud  physics  program.  The  Bureau's  early  position,  how- 
ever, seemed  to  lack  enthusiasm  for  a  research  program  at  the  time, 
largely  reflecting  agency  conservatism  and  some  unwillingness  to  be 
caught  up  in  a  technology  that  was  fraught  with  exaggerated  claims 
of  commercial  rainmakers.51  This  early  negative  outlook  of  the 
Weather  Bureau  was  modified  in  the  late  1960's  when  its  successive 
parent  organizations,  the  Environmental  Science  Services  Adminis- 
tration (ESSA)  and  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admin- 
istration (NOAA),  inaugurated  a  fresh  interest  in  a  weather  modifi- 
cation research  program.  The  Weather  Bureau  did  participate  with 
the  Navy  in  project  SCUD  in  1953-54  along  the  east  coast,  in  an 
attempt  to  modify  the  behavior  of  extratropical  cyclones  by  artificial 
nucleation. 

The  third  Federal  agency  conducting  weather  modification  re- 
search during  this  period  was  the  Forest  Service  of  the  U.S.  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  which  in  1953  initiated  Project  Skyfire,  aimed 
at  suppressing  lightning,  a  major  cause  of  forest  fires.  This  project 
received  joint  support  later  during  the  1960's  from  the  National  Sci- 
ence Foundation,  and.  until  its  demise  in  1976.  was  the  longest  run- 
ning single  Federal  weather  modification  research  project. 

Confusion  and  uncertainty  in  the  state  of  weather  modification, 
owing  to  a  mixed  reaction  to  achipA-oments  and  claims  of  achieve- 
ment of  weathor  modification  operators  and  to  the  lack  of  a  cohesive 
research  program  in  the  Federal  Government,  led  to  the  establish- 
ment in  1953  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  by 
Public  Law  83-256.  During  the  conduct  of  the  intensive  investiga- 
tion of  the  subject  by  the  Advisory  Committee  between  1953  and 

r>1  Communications  from  F.  W.  Reichelderfer.  Chief  of  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau,  in  U.S. 
Congress.  Senate.  Committees  on  Interior  and  Insular  Affairs.  Interstate  and  Foreign  Com- 
merce, and  Agriculture  and  Forestry,  "Weather  Control  and  Augmented  Potable  Water 
Supply,"  Joinl  hearings,  ,92d  Cong.,  1st  sess..  Mar.  14.  15,  16,  19  and  Apr.  5,  1951,  Washing- 
ton, D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1951,  pp.  37^17. 


215 


1957.  the  committee  seems  to  have  provided  somewhat  of  a  coordina- 
tion function  and  even  some  modicum  of  direction  to  the  Federal 
effort  it  was  studying.  There  was  support  in  the  Congress  for  both 
the  formulation  and  the  Federal  management  by  the  Advisory  Com- 
mittee of  a  5-year  Federal-State  weather  modification  research  pro- 
gram, to  be  conducted  by  the  committee,  the  States,  universities,  and 
private  institutions.52  The  Advisory  Committee  favored  an  existing 
Federal  agency,  however,  for  this  proposed  management  function. 

Federal  structure;  1958-68 

The  Advisory  Committee,  reporting  in  1957,  provided  a  setting 
for  progress  over  the  next  10  years,  as  it  presented  elements  of  a 
national  policy  and  guidelines  for  future  development  of  a  research 
program.  A  former  NSF  program  manager  for  weather  modifica- 
tion, Earl  G.  Droessler,  recently  praised  the  work  of  the  Advisory 
Committee : 

The  Committee  did  a  remarkable  job  for  weather  modification.  Perhaps,  most 
importantly,  its  careful  study  and  reporting  in  the  1950's  gave  a  measure  of 
respect,  cohesion,  and  momentum  for  the  field  of  weather  modification,  and 
thus  provided  a  setting  for  progress  over  the  next  decade  and  more.  Prior  to 
the  work  of  the  committee,  the  field  was  plagued  with  tension  and 
uncertainty.53 

Encouraging  a  wide  research  program  in  meterology  as  the  essen- 
tial foundation  for  understanding  weather  modification,  the  Ad- 
visory Committee  named  the  National  Science  Foundation  as  its  rec- 
ommended agency  for  sponsoring  the  required  research  program. 
Accordingly,  the  Congress,  when  it  enacted  Public  Law  85-510,  di- 
rected the  NSF  to  initiate  and  support  a  program  in  weather  modi- 
fication and  effectively  named  the  NSF  as  lead  Federal  agency  for 
weather  modification. 

Weather  modification  research  enjoyed  a  position  of  high  value 
and  priority  among  the  top  leadership  of  the  Foundation.54  The  XSF 
promoted  a  vigorous  research  program  through  grants  to  universi- 
ties, scientific  societies  and  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  in- 
dustry, and  agencies  of  the  Federal  Government  and  established 
an  Advisory  Panel  for  Weather  Modification,  which  reported  to 
the  Foundation.  A  series  of  10  annual  reports  on  weather  modifica- 
tion were  published  by  the  NSF  for  fiscal  years  1959  through  1968. 
Recognizing  the  severe  shortage  of  trained  personnel,  the  NSF  es- 
tablished the  policy  of  financing  graduate  and  postgraduate  train- 
ing as  part  of  its  grant  support  program,  stating  in  its  second  annual 
report,  "In  the  field  of  weather  modification  our  greatest  deficiency 
today  is  skilled  manpower."  55 

At  the  working  level,  representatives  of  nine  Government  agencies 
were  called  together  by  the  NSF  to  form  the  Interagency  Conference 
on  Weather  Modification  to  afford  a  mechanism  for  communication  on 
weather  modification  activities  and  to  plan  and  develop  cooperative 

32  See.  for  example.  S.  86  and  companion  House  bills.  H.R.  3631.  H.R.  '5232,  H.R.  5954, 
and  H.R.  5958.  introduced  in  the  85th  Congress  during  1957. 

53  Droessler.  Earl  G..  "Weather  Modification  :  Federal  Policies.  Funding  from  all  Sources, 
Interagency  Coordination,"  background  paper  prepared  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Com- 
merce Weather  Modification  Advisorv  Board.  Raleigh,  N.C.,  Mar.  1,  1977,  p.  1. 

"Ibid.,  p.  2. 

5r>  National  Science  Foundation.  "Weather  Modification  ;  Second  Annual  Report  for  Fiscal 
Year  ended  June  30,  1960."  Washington.  D.C..  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  June  16, 
1961.  p.  1. 


216 


projects.56  Joint  Federal  projects  were  established  between  the  Foun- 
dation- and  the  Departments  of  Agriculture,  Commerce,  and  Interior. 
During  this  period  the  Congress,  wanting  to  support  more  applied  re- 
search directed  toward  a  major  problem,  such  as  requirements  for  more 
precipitation  in  the  West,  appropriated  funds  for  what  was  to  become 
a  major  weather  modification  program  under  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion in  the  Department  of  the  Interior.  The  Foundation  warmly  en- 
dorsed the  Bureau  of  Reclamation's  "Project  Sky  water"  and  has  since 
funded  many  of  the  research  projects  associated  with  this  program.57 

Fi  deral  structure;  1968-77 

The  lead  agency  responsibilities  and  authorities  of  the  National 
Science  Foundation  acquired  in  1958  under  Public  Law  85-510  were 
abrogated  by  Public  Law  90-407,  enacted  July  18, 1968,  which  became 
effective  September  1,  1968.  A  lapse  in  Federal  policy  and  Federal 
structure  has  since  occurred  as  a  result  of  congressional  and  executive 
inaction,  although  after  a  hiatus  of  over  3  years,  some  responsibility 
was  given  to  XOAA  in  1971;  namely,  that  for  collecting  and  dis- 
seminating information  on  weather  modification  projects  in  the  United 
States.  This  requirement,  directed  by  Public  Law  92-205,  of  Decem- 
ber 18, 1971,  has  been  the  single  Federal  weather  modification  function 
prescribed  by  law  until  1976,  when  Public  Law  94-490  required  the 
Secretary  of  Commerce  to  conduct  a  study  to  recommend  a  national 
policy  and  a  research  program  in  weather  modification.  The  lead 
agency  responsibility  has  never  been  reassigned,  and  Federal  leader- 
ship for  research  purposes  is  dispersed  among  the  several  agencies. 

The  only  semblance  of  weather  modification  leadership  in  the  Fed- 
eral structure  during  this  period  has  been  through  the  coordination 
mechanism  of  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences (ICAS).  The  ICAS  has  established  some  policy  guidelines  and 
has  sponsored  activities,  such  as  the  annual  interagency  weather  modi- 
fication conferences,  intended  to  foster  cooperation  among  agency 
programs.  It  has  not  assumed  a  management  role  nor  has  it  sought  to 
intervene  in  the  budgeting  processes  by  which  the  several  agency  pro- 
grams are  supported.  The  activities  of  the  ICAS  are  discussed  in  more 
detail  in  a  section  to  follow  on  coordination  of  Federal  weather  modi- 
fication activities. 

Future  Federal  organization  for  weather  modification 

The  present  intensive  study  underway  within  the  Department  of 
Commerce,  as  directed  by  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy 
Act  of  1976,  Public  Law  94-490,  mav  be  laying  the  groundwork  for  a 
clear  Federal  policy  in  weather  modification,  after  a  10-year  lapse  in 
Federal  leadership  and  two  decades  after  the  first  major  Federal 
wpp.ther  modification  study  wns  submitted  to  the  President  and  the 
Concrress.  The  new  approach  will  benefit  from  scientific  and  technical 
advnn^os  as  well  as  the  greater  attention  which  has  been  given  in  recent 

54  t<  n  annual  interaerpnev  conferences  on  weather  modification  wore  sponsored  by  the 
National  Seience  Foundation  throujrh  10f»S.  Since  that  year,  when  the  lead  asrency  role  was 
fn1-Pn  from  t|lfl  -yQ-p  r,v  public  Law  00  407.  the  annual  interagency  conference  has  been 
sponsored  by  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (TCAS>.  The  11th 
conference  sponsored  by  ICAS.  was  conducted  by  the  NSF  at  t^e  request  of  ICAS  :  banning 
with  tbe  12th.  the  annual  conference  have  been  conducted  by  NO  A  A.  at  the  request  of  ICAS, 

th%°PrC^ess1  — "^Weather  Modification:  Federal  Policies,  Funding  from  all  Sources,  Inter- 
agency  Coordination,"  1977,  p.  4. 


217 


years  to  legal,  social,  economic,  ecological,  and  international  aspects 
of  the  subject.  Part  of  the  national  policy  which  will  presumably  be 
established  by  the  Congress  following  the  study  (very  likely  during 
the  96th  Congress)  will  be  a  reorganized  or  reconstituted  Federal 
structure  for  leading  and  managing  the  Federal  activities  in  weather 
modification. 

Kecognizing  that  most  studies  of  the  past  decade  have  proposed  solv- 
ing the  apparent  fragmentation  of  Federal  projects  and  responsibil- 
ities by  redesignating  a  lead  agency,  and  also  observing  some  of  the 
objections  and  shortcomings  of  such  a  designation,  the  Commerce  De- 
partment's Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  has  considered  vari- 
ous options  for  structuring  the  Federal  program.  One  possible  option 
the  Board  is  considering  in  its  study  is  the  creation  of  a  special  agency 
for  weather  modification,  "with  a  mandate  to  learn  what  needs  to  be 
learned  about  weather  modification  and  to  insure  regulation  of  its 
practice,"  58  The  new  agency  would  "plan,  budget,  spur,  supervise,  and 
continually  evalute  a  Federal  program  of  research  and  development, 
designed  to  enhance  the  atmospheric  environment."  Under  this  concept 
existing  agency  projects  would  become  part  of  a  coordinated  Federal 
effort,  and  future  projects  would  be  presented  to  the  Congress  and  to 
the  Executive  "as  an  understandable  part  of  a  coherent  R  and  D 
strategy."  59 

The  Advisory  Board  has  had  difficulty  in  deciding  where  such  a  new 
agency  should  be  placed  in  the  executive  structure.  Presumably  it  could 
be  made  part  of  an  existing  structure  or  it  could  be  established  as  a 
"semi-autonomous"  agency  attached  to  an  existing  department  for  ad- 
ministrative purposes  and  support.  With  the  creation  of  a  Department 
of  Natural  Resources,  as  has  been  proposed,  a  logical  departmental 
home  for  the  suggested  weather  modification  agency  would  be  found. 
The  Board  further  suggests  that  such  a  new  agency,  regardless  of  its 
location  in  the  Federal  structure,  should  work  closely  with  a  small 
(five-  to  nine-member)  Advisory  Board,  composed  of  people  ac- 
quainted with  atmospheric  sciences,  user  needs,  operational  realities, 
advantages  of  costs  and  benefits,  and  "the  broader  national  and  inter- 
national issues  involved."  60 

The  current  thinking  of  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board 
also  includes  a  laboratory  center  as  part  of  the  proposed  new  agency, 
one  newly  established  or  an  existing  Federal  laboratory  converted  to 
weather  modification  research.  While  some  research  and  development 
would  be  conducted  "in  house"  by  the  agency,  portions  of  the  coordi- 
nated research  effort  would  be  allocated  to  other  Federal  agencies  or  by 
contract  to  universities  and  other  non-Federal  institutions.61 

Droessler  has  also  observed  increased  individual  support  for  the  con- 
cept of  a  weather  modification  national  laboratory.  lie  suggests  that 
the  location  of  such  a  center  in  the  Federal  structure  should  be  deter- 
mined by  its  principal  research  thrust.  If  basic  scientific  research,  such 
as  that  which  "undergirds"  weather  modification  applications,  is  pri- 
mary, he  suggests  that  NSF  should  have  the  responsibility.  If  the  focus 
of  the  new  proposed  laboratory  should  be  on  severe  storm  amelioration, 

58  Cleveland,  "A  U.S.  Policy  to  Enhance  the  Atmospheric  Environment,"  discussion  paper 
by  thp  Weather  Modification  Advisorv  Board.  Oct.  21,  1977,  pp.  23-24. 
69  Ibid.,  p.  24. 

60  Ibid. 

61  Ibid.,  p.  25. 


218 


including  hurricane  research,  NO AA  should  be  the  management  choice. 
Finally,  if  research  of  the  new  laboratory  is  aimed  toward  the  impacts 
of  weather  modification  on  agriculture,  the  U.S.  Department  of  Agri- 
culture should  be  directed  to  establish  and  manage  the  facility.62 

A  number  of  bills  were  introduced  in  the  Congress  from  time  to  time 
which  would  have  established  within  one  agency  or  another  a  single 
agency  with  responsibility  for  managing  a  Federal  weather  modifica- 
tion program.  For  example,  S.  2875  in  the  89th  Congress  would  have 
created  in  the  Department  of  the  Interior  a  central  scientific  and  en- 
gineering facility  and  regional  research  and  operations  centers.  In  the 
same  Congress,  S.  2916,  which  did  pass  the  Senate,  would  have  pro- 
vided much  the  same  structure  within  the  Department  of  Commerce. 
Both  bills  permitted  weather  modification  research  in  support  of  mis- 
sions by  the  other  Federal  agencies,  but  established  a  focal  point  for 
research  and  for  other  management  functions  in  the  Department  of  the 
Interior  or  the  Department  of  Commerce,  respectively.63 

In  addition  to  management  of  Federal  research  programs  and  co- 
ordination of  these  programs,  the  Federal  weather  modification  orga- 
nizational structure  must  also  be  concerned  with  other  functions.  These 
could  include  planning,  project  review,  data  collection  and  monitoring, 
regulation,  licensing,  and  indemnification.  The  institutional  arrange- 
ment within  which  these  activities  are  handled  could  be  part  of  the 
agency  with  prime  research  responsibility,  or  some  or  all  of  these  func- 
tions could  be  assigned  elsewhere.  For  example,  the  State  Department 
will  presumably  continue  to  exercise  appropriate  authorities  with 
regard  to  international  programs  or  U.S.  programs  with  potential 
impacts  on  other  nations,  though  responsibility  for  cooperation  on 
the  scientific  and  technical  aspects  of  such  projects  would  quite  natur- 
ally be  given  to  one  or  more  research  agencies.  Assignment  of  some  of 
these  functions  might  be  to  other  agencies  or  to  special  commissions, 
established  as  in  some  States,  to  deal  with  regulation,  licensing,  and 
indemnification. 

Grant  argues  that  "the  extensive  multidisciplinary  nature  of  and 
the  potential  impact  on  large  segments  of  society  by  weather  modifica- 
tion demands  great  breadth  in  the  organizational  structure  to  manage 
the  development  of  weather  modification."  64  He  continues : 

In  view  of  these  complex  involvements  and  interactions,  it  is  clear  that  the 
governmental  organizational  structure  needs  to  he  much  broader  than  the  mis- 
sion interests  of  the  respective  Federal  agencies.  Presently,  coordination  is 
effected  through  ICAS.  More  is  required.  The  present  program  in  weather  modi- 
fication is  too  fragmented  for  optimal  utilization  of  resources  to  concentrate  on 
all  aspects  of  the  priority  problems.  Weather  modification  has  not  moved  to  the 
stage  where  research  should  be  concentrated  in  the  respective  mission  agencies. 

Many  of  the  priorities  and  problems  are  basic  to  weather  modification  itself 
and  must  l>e  resolved  and  tested  before  emphasis  is  placed  on  the  respective  mis- 

62  Droessler,  "Weather  Modification  :  Federal  Policies,  Funding  From  All  Sources,  Inter- 
agency Coordination."  1!)77.  pp.  10—11. 

•>  For  analysis  of  these  and  other  related  bills  concerned  with  Federal  organization  for 
weather  modification  see  Johnson.  Ralph  W..  "Federal  Organization  for  Control  of  Weather 
Modification."  In  Howard  J.  Taubenfeld  (editor),  "Controlling  the  Weather,"  New  York. 
Dunellen.  1970.  pp.  145-158. 

64  Grant.  Lewis  (>..  testimony  in  :  U.S.  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Committee  on 
Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  "Weather 
Modification."  hearings,  04th  Cong..  2d  sees.,  June  15-18,  1977.  Washington,  D.C..  U.S. 
Government  Frinting  Office,  1976,  p.  290. 


219 


sion  users.  Present  fragmentation  of  effort,  combined  with  subcritical  support 
levels,  retards  adequate  progress  toward  the  goal  of  problem  resolution  and  de- 
velopment of  application  capability. 

I  suggest  that  a  commission-type  approach  be  considered.  This  would  permit 
representation  of  various  weather  modification  missions  by  researchers,  users, 
and  the  general  public.  Such  a  commission  could  develop  a  comprehensive  and 
coordinated  national  weather  modification  policy  and  program  of  weather  modi- 
fication research.  ...  A  positive  national  program  and  funding  levels  could  be 
recommended  to  Congress.  I  believe  that  management  of  the  program  through 
this  commission  for  the  next  five  to  ten  years  should  also  be  considered.  The 
highest  standards  possible  and  the  broadest  representation  possible  should  be 
required  for  this  commission  and  its  staff. 

As  the  technological  capability  develops  and  can  respond  to  various  uses,  the 
lull  responsibility  for  the  respective  uses  could  transfer  to  the  mission  agencies 
at  that  time.  Continued  involvement  by  the  agencies  during  the  development 
stages  could  make  a  smooth  transition  possible.  If  the  national  research  and 
development  program  is  organized  and  managed  through  such  a  commission,  the 
commission  should  not  have  the  dual  role  of  regulating  weather  modification  at 
the  same  time  it  has  the  responsibility  for  its  developmient.85 

Changnon  has  recommended  an  almost  total  reorganization  of  the 
Federal  weather  modification  structure  in  order  to  handle  better  the 
current  major  research  responsibilities;  evaluation  efforts  needed  im- 
mediately, which  are  not  being  addressed ;  and  readiness  to  perform  re- 
sponsibilities of  the  near  future,  including  operations,  regulation,  and 
compensation.  He  suggests  twro  approaches  to  this  reorganization, 
shown  schematically  in  figure  l.66 

In  his  first  approach,  Changnon  would  place  all  weather  modifica- 
tion activities,  except  regulation  and  compensation,  in  one  agency 
(Agency  X,  fig.  la),  either  a  new  agency  or  a  division  of  one  exist- 
ing. From  a  weather  modification  and  a  user  standpoint  the  likely  can- 
didates proposed  among  existing  agencies  are  the  U.S.  Department  of 
Agriculture  and  XOAA.  This  primary  agency  would  develop  a  na- 
tional laboratory  which  would  both  conduct  research  and  development 
and  also  subcontract  such  efforts.  The  agency  and  its  laboratory  would 
be  responsible  for  program  design,  monitoring,  and  evaluation  of  all 
experimental  and  operational  projects  and  would  report  results  to  the 
regulatory  agency  (Agency  Y,  fig.  la).  The  laboratory  would  also 
be  responsible  for  Federal  operational  efforts  and  for  development  of 
guidelines  for  private  operators.  Close  interaction  would  be  required 
with  the  States,  private  business,  and  the  public  within  operational 
regions.  Agency  Y  could  be  a  new  agency  or  an  existing  one,  such  as 
the  Environmental  Protection  Agency  or  XOAA.  provided  that  NOAA 
is  not  also  chosen  as  Agency  X.  Agency  Y  would  also  develop  and  ad- 
minister compensatory  mechanisms  to  benefit  those  identified  as  losers 
as  a  result  of  weather  modification  programs.  This  first  approach  would 
also  include  a  Presidential  board  or  commission  of  appointed  non- 
Federal  members  with  statutory  responsibility  for  reporting  annually 
to  the  President  and  the  Congress  on  all  weather  modification  activi- 
ties performed  by  Agencies  X  and  Y.67 

05  Ibid.,  pp.  290-291. 

66  Changnon.  Stanley  A..  Jr..  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification."  background 
paper  prepared  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory 
Board.  Urbana.  111.,  Mar.  9.  1977,  pp.  24-27. 

87  Ibid.,  pp.  25-26. 


220 


221 


In  Changnon's  second  organizational  approach,  there  are  similarities 
to  the  first,  but  current  research  activities  would  be  retained  with  some 
Federal  agencies  (see  fig.  lb).  Agency  Y  would  handle  regulatory- 
compensatory  functions  as  in  the  first  approach,  and  a  Presidential 
board  or  commission  would  make  critical  annual  assessments  of  the 
progress  and  activities  in  all  agencies  as  well  as  report  annually  to  the 
President  and  the  Congress.  A  major  agency,  new  or  existing,  would 
have  direct  responsibility  for  its  own  activities  as  well  as  the  research 
programs  of  other  Federal  agencies.  Thus,  existing  programs  of  the 
Departments  of  Agriculture,  Commerce,  and  Defense  and  of  the  Na- 
tional Science  Foundation  would  continue,  but  under  direction  of 
Agency  X,  each  program  directed  toward  specific  agency  missions. 
Other  agencies  currently  involved  in  weather  modification — the  De- 
partments of  Energy,  Interior,  and  Transportation,  and  the  National 
Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration — would  be  stripped  of  their 
programs.68 

In  his  1970  paper,  Johnson  explored  some  of  the  more  plausible  in- 
stitutional arrangements  that  could  be  designed  for  Federal  manage- 
ment of  weather  modification.69  He  identified  the  various  functions 
into  which  such  management  responsibilities  could  be  divided  and  at- 
tempted to  show  the  optimum  ways  that  each  function  might  be 
handled.  A  major  point  which  Jolmson  made  then,  which  is  still  ap- 
propriate today,  is  that  the  Federal  institutional  arrangements  should 
depend  on  the  pace  of  the  development  of  weather  modification  tech- 
nology. Thus,  establishment  of  a  full-blown  structure  dealing  with  all 
weather  modification  functions  may  not  yet  be  advisable,  even  in  1973. 

COORDINATION    AND    ADVISORY    MECHANISMS    FOR    FEDERAL  WEATHER 
MODIFICATION  PROGRAMS 

Introduction 

There  are  a  number  of  formal  and  informal  mechanisms  by  which 
the  Federal  research  program  in  weather  modification  is  coordinated, 
and  there  exist  a  variety  of  panels,  committees,  and  organizations — 
some  governmental  and  some  quasi-governmental — which  provide  ad- 
vice and  a  forum  for  exchange  of  information  on  various  aspects  of 
weather  modification.  Coordination  is  also  achieved  through  profes- 
sional society  meetings  and  through  workshops  on  specific  problems 
which  are  scheduled  by  Federal  agencies  from  time  to  time. 

Much  of  the  coordination  of  weather  modification  projects  attempted 
by  agency  representatives  consists  of  exchange  of  information  on  the 
scope  and  the  funding  of  the  different  agency  programs,  this  ex- 
change accomplished  through  meetings  of  committees,  conferences, 
and  panels.  Through  such  exchange  it  is  expected  that  consensus  can 
be  approached  and  coordination  achieved. 

Various  opinions  have  been  expressed  on  the  degree  to  which  Fed- 
eral weather  modification  programs  are  coordinated.  According  to 
Droessler,  "The  weather  modification  research  program  probably  is 
as  well  coordinated  as  any  research  effort  within  the  Federal  Govern- 

68  Ibid.,  p.  26-27. 

89  Johnson,  "Federal  Organization  or  Control  of  Weather  Modification,"  1970,  pp.  131-1S0. 


34-SoT— 79  17 


222 


ment."  70  Dr.  Alfred  J.  Eggers,  Jr.,  former  Assistant  Director  for  Re- 
search Applications  at  the  S"SF  has  recently  stated  that : 

In  summary,  the  current  programs  in  weather  modification  of  the  various 
agencies  appear  to  be  sufficiently  well  coordinated  to  avoid  unknowing  duplica- 
tions of  efforts,  but  not  so  rigidly  coordinated  as  to  unduly  narrow  the  range 
of  scientific  approaches  being  taken  to  respond  to  several  agency  missions. 
Weather  modification  is  not  a  well-developed  technology.  Given  the  current 
state  of  the  art,  the  current  mechanisms  of  coordination  appear  to  be  appropriate 
and  adequate.71 

A  contrary  view  was  stated  in  the  report  by  the  General  Accounting 
Office  (GAO)  on  the  need  for  a  national  program  in  weather  modifica- 
tion research : 

A  national  program  in  weather  modification  research  is  necessary  to  effectively 
control  activities  of  the  agencies  involved.  Although  this  need  was  recognized  as 
early  as  1966.  the  organizations  established  to  coordinate  these  activities  have 
not  developed  and  implemented  an  effective  overall  national  program.  Although 
coordinating  groups  have  tried  to  develop  national  programs,  their  implementa- 
tion has  not  been  successful.  The  present  fragmentation  of  research  efforts  has 
made  it  extremely  difficult  for  agencies  to  conduct  effective  field  research  which, 
in  the  case  of  weather  modification,  must  precede  operational  activities.72 

In  answer  to  this  conclusion  of  the  GAO  report  that  the  Federal 
weather  modification  research  program  was  not  effectively  coordi- 
nated, the  Office  of  Management  and  Budget  (OMB)  replied  that: 

The  point  on  ineffective  coordination  of  research  projects  is  not  supported  by 
fact.  Weather  modification  research  is  well  coordinated  by  the  Interdepartmen- 
tal Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS).  ICAS  meets  monthly  and  pro- 
vides members  and  observers  the  opportunity  to  exchange  information  in  a  timely 
manner.  Interdepartmental  coordination  of  weather  modification  activities  has 
been,  in  our  opinion,  achieved  through  the  efforts  of  ICAS  and  the  member 
agencies  in  an  exemplary  manner.7'' 

The  several  means,  formal  and  informal,  by  which  the  Federal 
weather  modification  research  program  is  coordinated,  or  by  which 
advice  on  agency  programs  is  provided,  are  identified  and  discussed  in 
the  following  subsections. 

The  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS) 

The  principal  mechanism  for  coordination  of  Federal  weather 
modification  programs  has  been  the  ICAS.  Weather  modification 
has  been  a  principal  concern  of  the  committee  since  its  inception  in 
1959,  and  it  was  recently  stated  that  the  ICAS  has  spent  more  effort 
dealing  with  weather  modification  than  with  any  other  single  topic.74 
This  close  tie  and  continued  interest  by  the  ICAS  on  weather  modi- 
fication was  instilled  from  its  beginning,  when  it  incorporated  func- 
tions of  an  existing  interagency  weather  modification  committee. 

In  195s.  the  National  Science  Foundation  recognized  the  need  for 
a  formal  interagency  coordinating  mechanism  as  part  of  its  newly 

70  Droessler.  "Weather  Modification  :  Federal  Policies,  Funding  From  All  Sources,  Inter- 
agency Coordination,"  1!*77.  p.  14. 

71  Eggers,  testimony  before  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee 
on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  107(5.  pp.  111-112. 

-  Comptroller  of  the  United  States.  "Need  for  a  National  Weather  Modification  Research 
Propnim  '*  report  to  the  Congress,  General  Accounting  Office,  B-133202,  Washington,  D.C., 
Aug.  23.  1974,  p.  23. 

Sawhlll.  John  C.  Associate  Director,  Office  of  Management  and  Budget.  In  a  letter  to 
Morton  B.  Henig,  Associate  Director,  Manpower  and  Welfare  Division,  General  Accounting 
Office.  Sept.  12.  1973. 

74  Todd.  Edward  P.  (Chairman  of  the  Tn t erdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences), in  testimony  at  hearings  on  weather  modification  before  the  Subcommittee  on  the 
Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  Committee  on  Science  and  Technologv.  U  S.  House  of 
Representatives,  June  16,  1976,  p.  127. 


223 


assigned  statutory  responsibilities  as  weather  modification  lead  agency 
and  established  an  Interdepartmental  Committee  on  Weather  Modi- 
fication. A  year  later  the  newly  established  Federal  Council  for  Sci- 
ence and  Technology  (FCST)  considered  the  need  for  a  committee  to 
cover  atmospheric  sciences;  and,  upon  agreement  between  the  Presi- 
dent's science  adviser  and  the  Director  of  the  XSF,  the  existing  Inter- 
departmental Committee  on  Weather  Modification  was  formally 
reconstituted  as  the  FCST's  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  At- 
mospheric Sciences.  ICAS  held  its  first  meeting  September  9,  1959. 75> 76 

The  National  Science  and  Technology  Policy,  Organization,  and 
Priorities  Act  of  1976  (Public  Law  94-282)  was^  signed  May  11,  1976, 
creating  the  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering, 
and  Technology  (FCCSET) .  Under  the  new  law,  the  ICAS,  a  subcom- 
mittee of  the  former  FCST.  should  have  ceased  to  function,  since 
the  parent  council  was  abolished.  Prior  to  the  signing  of  Public  Law 
94-282,  however,  the  FCST  Chairman  addressed  a  letter  to  all  FCST 
subcommittee  chairmen,  indicating  that  these  committees  should  con- 
tinue their  normal  activities  until  such  time  as  a  new  organizational 
structure  for  FCCSET  could  be  established  and  begin  to  function. 
Subsequently,  the  FCCSET  established  several  supporting  subcom- 
mittees, one  of  which  is  the  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere 
(CAO) .  The  ICAS  was  formally  adopted  by  the  CAO  on  a  temporary 
basis,  pending  creation  of  its  own  subcommittee  structure.  Conse- 
quently, the  ICAS  lias  continued  to  hold  meetings  and  published  its 
customary  annual  report,  under  authority  given  by  the  Chairman  of 
the  CAO.77  Although  the  future  of  the  ICAS  is  uncertain,  a  recent 
survey  indicated  that  its  members  favored  continuation  of  an  *'ICAS- 
like'?  activity.  The  committee  thus  intends  to  meet  and  conduct  business, 
at  a  reduced  level  of  activity,  until  the  CAO  organization  becomes  firm 
and  is  in  full  operation.78 

The  coordination  activities  of  the  ICAS  for  the  Federal  weather 
modification  research  program  has  been  particularly  valuable,  espe- 
cially since  1968,  when  the  Xational  Science  Foundation  was  relieved 
of  its  lead  agency  role.  Prior  to  that  time  the  XSF  had  provided  leader- 
ship to  the  Federal  program  in  a  number  of  ways.  Beginning  in  1969 
the  ICAS  has  continued  the  sponsorship  of  the  annual  Interagency 
Conference  on  Weather  Modification,  which  the  XSF  had  initiated  10 
years  earlier.  This  annual  conference  is  a  "partial  mechanism  to  pro- 
mote effective  communications  and  a  source  of  shared  responsibility 
among  the  Washington  program  managers  and  the  field  program 
managers."  79  These  conferences  provide  a  forum  for  exchanging  in- 

75  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  '"Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  re- 
port to  the  National  Science  Foundation.  XSF  66-3,  Washington.  D.C..  Dec.  20.  1965,  p.  131. 

76  A  discussion  of  the  history  and  activities  of  the  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Tech- 
nology is  found  in  the  following  report:  Bates.  Dorothy  M.  (coordinator).  Interagency  Co- 
ordination of  Federal  Scientific  Research  and  Development  :  The  Federal  Council  for  Sci- 
ence and  Technology.  Report  prepared  by  the  Science  Policy  Research  Division  of  the  Con- 
gressional Research  Service  for  the  Subcommittee  on  Domestic  and  International  Scientific 
Planning  and  Analysis.  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  U.S.  House  of  Representa- 
tives. Committee  Print.  Washington.  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1976.  447  pp.  Of  spe- 
cial interest  in  this  report  is  a  case  history  of  the  ICAS:  Morrison.  Robert  E.  The  Inter- 
departmental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  :  a  case  history.  App.  Ln  pp.  381-396. 
(Included  in  the  case  history  is  a  list  of  ICAS  publications  through  July  1976.) 

"  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science.  Engineering,  and  Technology.  Committee  on 
Oceans  and  Atmosphere.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences.  National 
Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  fiscal  year  1978.  ICAS  21-FY7S.  September  1977,  96  pp. 

7S  Ibid.,  p.  iii. 

"9  Drossier.  Weather  Modification:  Federal  Policies.  Funding  From  All  Sources  Inter- 
agency Coordination,  p.  14. 


224 


formation  on  progress  in  past  years,  plans  for  the  coming  year, 
thoughts  on  future  projects,  and  suggestions  on  solutions  to  various 
problems  encountered.  The  annual  conferences,  under  ICAS  sponsor- 
ship, beginning  with  the  11th  in  1969,  have  been  hosted,  at  the  request 
of  the  ICAS,  by  the  NSF  and  by  NOAA.  The  NSF  hosted  the  11th 
conference,  and  XOAA  has  hosted  all  of  those  since,  starting  with 
the  12th. 

At  regular  meetings  of  the  ICAS,  major  weather  modification  pro- 
grams of  member  agencies  are  frequently  reviewed  through  project 
briefings  by  Washington  and  field  program  managers.  The  ICAS  has 
formed  standing  and  ad  hoc  panels  to  which  are  assigned  responsibili- 
ties for  specific  facets  of  the  weather  modificaion  program.  Panels  in 
the  past  have  worked  on  problems  such  as  legislation  on  weather  modi- 
fication, a  national  plan  for  the  Federal  weather  modification  program, 
and  a  plan  for  accelerating  progress  in  weather  modification.  These 
panels  address  topics  as  requested  by  the  parent  committee  and  make 
recommendations  to  the  ICAS  for  actions  as  required.  Two  specific 
ICAS  reports  have  dealt  with  the  subject.80'  81 

Besides  formal  coordination  afforded  by  the  annual  conferences,  dis- 
cussions at  ICAS  meetings,  and  studies  undertaken  by  ICAS  panels, 
there  is  also  included  an  account  of  the  Federal  weather  modification 
program  as  an  appendix  to  the  annual  ICAS  report.82  In  the  early 
years  of  the  ICAS  member  agencies  reported  their  funding  for  the 
general  support  of  atmospheric  sciences  only  in  two  broad  categories, 
meteorology  and  aeronomy.  Beginning  with  fiscal  year  1963  the  agen- 
cies began  to  identify  specific  funds  for  weather  modification,  and  this 
information  has  been  included  since  in  the  annual  ICAS  report  along 
with  brief  descriptions  of  member  agency  programs. 

It  was  at  the  request  of  the  ICAS  and  with  the  cooperation  of  the 
Secretary  of  Commerce  that  Federal  agencies  began  to  report  their 
weather  modification  research  activities  to  XOAA  as  of  November  1, 
1973.83  Public  Law  92-205  requires  such  reporting  by  all  nonfederal!}' 
sponsored  weather  modification  projects  in  the  United  States  and  its 
territories.84  This  voluntary  reporting  by  Federal  agencies,  initiated 
by  the  ICAS,  thus  assured  that  the  central  source  of  information  on 
weather  modification  projects  in  the  United  States  is  reasonably 
complete. 

In  its  1971  annual  report,  the  ICAS  identified  selected  major  re- 
search projects  in  weather  modification  which  were  designated  as  na- 
tional projects.85  These  national  projects  were  formulated  by  the 
ICAS  members  through  combination  of  agency  projects  in  each  of 
seven  categories  of  weather  modification  assigning  lead  agency  respon- 
sibilities in  most  cases  to  that  agency  with  the  most  significant  ongoing 

80  Newell.  Homer  E.  A  recommended  national  program  in  weather  modification.  Federal 
Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences ICAS  report  No.  10a.  Washington.  D.C.,  November  1966.  93  pp. 

81  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  report  No.  15a.  Washington.  D.C.,  June  1971,  50  pp. 

82  The  most  recent  account  is  found  in  the  latest  ICAS  annual  report :  Federal  Coordinat- 
ing Council  for  Science.  Engineering,  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for 
Atmospheric  Sciences.  ICAS  21-FY7S.  Pp.  87-94. 

83  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  fiscal  rear  1975.  ICAS  18-FY  75 
Washington,  DC.  May  1974.  n.  iv. 

M  See  earlier  discussions  on  Public  Law  92  205  under  congressional  activities,  p.  197.  and 
under  tbe  administration  of  the  reporting  program  by  NOAA.  p.  2'.V2. 

Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  fiscal  year  1972.  ICAS  report 
No.  15.  March  1971,  pp.  5-6. 


225 


project (s)  within  each  category.  The  proposed  national  projects  and 
respective  lead  agencies  were : 

1.  National  Colorado  River  Basin  pilot  project. — Bureau  of  Recla- 
mation, Department  of  the  Interior :  To  test  the  feasibility  of  apply- 
ing a  cloud  seeding  technology,  proven  effective  under  certain  condi- 
tions, to  a  river  basin  for  a  winter  season  to  augment  the  seasonal 
snowpack. 

'2.  National  hurricane  modification  project. — National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration,  Department  of  Commerce :  To  develop 
a  seeding  technology  and  associated  mathematical  models  to  reduce 
the  maximum  surface  winds  associated  with  hurricanes. 

3.  National  lightning  suppression  project. — Forest  Service,  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture :  To  develop  a  seeding  technology  and  associated 
physical  and  mathematical  models  to  reduce  the  frequency  of  forest 
fire-starting  lightning  strokes  from  cumulonimbus  clouds. 

4.  National  cumulus  modification  project. — National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration,  Department  of  Commerce :  To  develop 
a  seeding  technology  and  associated  mathematical  models  to  promote 
the  growth  of  cumulus  clouds  in  order  to  increase  the  resulting  natural 
rainfall  in  areas  where  needed. 

5.  National  hail  research  experiment. — National  Science  Founda- 
tion :  To  develop  a  seeding  technology  and  associated  mathematical 
models  to  reduce  the  incidence  of  damaging  hailfall  from  cumulonim- 
bus clouds  without  adversely  affecting  the  associated  rainfall. 

6.  National  Great  Lakes  snoio  redistribution  project. — National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Department  of  Commerce  : 
To  develop  a  seeding  technology  and  associated  mathematical  models 
to  spread  the  heavy  snowfall  of  the  Great  Lakes  coastal  region  farther 
inland. 

7.  National  fog  modification  project. — Federal  Aviation  Adminis- 
tration, Department  of  Transportation :  To  develop  seeding  or  other 
technology  and  associated  physical  and  mathematical  models  to  reduce 
the  visibility  restrictions  imposed  by  warm  and  cold  fogs  where  and  to 
the  extent  needed.86 

Although  most  of  these  national  projects  were  continued  for  at  least 
a  while,  some  of  them  failed  to  materialize,  as  hoped,  as  truly  national 
projects.  Few  received  the  expected  interagency  support  and  planning 
effort  envisioned;  however,  in  spite  of  these  deficiencies,  some  were 
pursued  by  the  lead  agencies,  largely  as  major  single-agency  projects. 
The  National  Hail  Research  Experiment,  conducted  by  the  National 
Science  Foundation  perhaps  came  closest  to  a  truly  national  project 
and.  with  assistance  from  other  Federal  agencies,  continued  through 
1976. 87  A  critique  of  the  national  projects  in  weather  modification  was 
included  in  the  1974  report  of  the  General  Accounting  Office  on  the 
need  for  a  national  program  in  weather  modification  research.88 

In  answer  to  charges  that  the  Federal  weather  modification  research 
effort  has  been  poorly  coordinated,  a  conclusion  of  various  studies  that 
have  been  made,  the  Chairman  of  the  ICAS  recently  said,  "Within  the 
IOAS  we  have  considered  coordination  as  it  is  defined,  namely,  har- 

»  Ibid. 

Shc  discussion  of  the  national  bail  research  project  under  following  section  on  the  pro- 
gram of  the  National  Science  Foundation,  p.  274  ff. 

^Comptroller  General  of  the  United  States.  Need  for  a  national  weather  modification 
research  program.  B-133202,  1974.  Pp.  16-22. 


226 


monious  action,  communication  within  Government.  I  submit  that,, 
using  that  definition,  the  weather  modification  research  program  is 
probably  as  well  coordinated  as  any  effort  within  the  Government,  with 
the  possible  exception  of  programs  that  are  entirely  within  the  purview 
of  a  single  agency.  The  critics  of  the  ICAS  coordination  effort,  how- 
ever, seem  to  nave  been  interpreting  coordination  as  including  manage- 
ment ;  the  ICAS  is  not  a  management  agent.'' 89 

The  National  Academy  of  Sciences/ Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences (N AS/GAS) 

Advice  has  been  provided  to  the  Federal  Government  through  ad- 
visory panels,  intensive  studies,  and  published  reports  on  weather 
modification,  by  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  The  Committee 
on  Atmospheric  Sciences  (CAS)  was  organized  under  the  National 
Research  Council  of  the  Academy  in  1956,  with  the  stated  purpose  of 
addressing  .  .  itself  to  the  task  of  viewing  in  broad  perspective  the 
present  activities  in  research  and  education,  the  exchange  of  informa- 
tion and  related  matters  as  they  affect  the  status  of  the  field  and  future 
progress  toward  a  balanced  national  program  in  the  atmospheric 
sciences,  and  participation  in  international  programs."  90 

At  the  request  of,  and  sponsored  by,  the  National  Science  Founda- 
tion, a  conference  was  organized  and  conducted  by  the  NAS  in  1959, 
in  which  meteorologists,  mathematicians,  and  statisticians  met  to  ex- 
amine needs  in  weather  modification  experiments.  The  report  on  this 
Skyline  Conference  on  the  Design  and  Conduct  of  Experiments  in 
Weather  Modification,91  which  had  been  held  in  the  Shenandoah  Na- 
tional Park  in  Virginia,  made  a  strong  plea  for  careful  statistical 
design  of  weather  modification  experiments,  pointing  out  the  need  for 
long-term  programs,  standardization  of  design,  the  need  for  basic 
research  in  cloud  physics,  and  the  requirement  for  cooperation  between 
meteorologists  and  statisticians. 

In  March  1963,  the  CAS  appointed  a  Panel  on  Weather  and  Climate 
Modification,  "to  undertake  a  deliberate  and  thoughtful  review  of  the 
present  status  and  activities  in  this  field  and  of  its  potential  and  limi- 
tations in  the  future."  92  The  Panel  was  chaired  by  Dr.  Gordon  J.  F. 
MacDonald  and  was  comprised  of  11  Government  and  non-Govern- 
ment members.  The  Academy  Panel  worked  closely  with  the  NSF's 
Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification,  which  had  been  estab- 
Lished  in  1964.  Three  reports  were  subsequently  published  by  the  Panel,, 
based  on  in-depth  studies  which  had  been  undertaken. 

The  first  of  these,  "Scientific  Problems  of  Weather  Modification," 
appeared  in  1964;  03  the  second,  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification: 
Problems  and  Prospects,"  was  published  in  1966; 94  and  the  third, 

89  Todd.  Testimony  before  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee  on 
the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  June  197fi.  p.  S7. 

90  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Academy  of  Engineering.  Institute  of  Medicine; 
National  Research  Council.  Organization  and  members:  1975-1976.  Washington,  D.C.  Octo- 
ber 1975.  P.  81. 

n  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Report  of  the  Skyline  Con- 
ference on  the  Design  ami  Conduct  of  Experiments  in  Weather  Modification.  NAS— NBC  Pub- 
lication 742.  Washington.  D.C,  l!tn').  24  pp. 

92  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences.  Weather  and  Climate  Modification:  Problems  and  Prospects.  Volume  I.  summary 
and  recommendations.  Final  report  of  the  Panel  on  Weather  and  Climate  Modification.  Pub- 
lication No.  1350,  Washington,  D.C,  I960,  p.  vii. 

m  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences  Scientific  Problems  of  Weather  Modification  :  a  Report  of  the  Panel  on  Weather 
and  Climate  Modification.  NAS  NRC  Publication  No.  1236.  Washington.  D.C.  1964.  56  pp. 

ot  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  Publication  No.  1350.  1906.  In  two  volumes.  40  +  212  pp. 


227 


"Weather  Modification :  Problems  and  Progress,"  came  out  in  1973.95 
In  addition  to  the  reports  produced  by  the  panel,  two  other  National 
Academy  studies  were  conducted  in  the  1970's  which,  in  part,  addressed 
aspects  of  weather  modification.  The  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences surveyed  the  field  in  a  chapter  in  its  1971  publication,  "The 
Atmospheric  Sciences  and  Man's  Needs ;  Priorities  for  the  Future."  96 
In  1976  a  report  was  prepared  by  the  Committee  on  Climate  and 
Weather  Fluctuations  and  Agricultural  Production  of  the  Board  on 
Agriculture  and  Eenewable  Resources.  A  full  chapter  is  devoted  to 
weather  modification  in  this  report,  entitled  "Climate  and  Food; 
Climatic  Fluctuation  and  U.S.  Agricultural  Production." 97 

Project  Stormfury,  a  major  hurricane  modification  project  of  the 
Commerce  Department's  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admin- 
istration (NO  A  A), 98  from  its  inception  has  had  an  advisory  panel 
composed  of  prominent  scientists,  primarily  meteorologists.  Currently, 
the  panel  is  appointed  by  and  operates  under  the  auspices  of  the  Na- 
tional Academy  of  Sciences,  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences. 
Members  of  the  Stomfurv  Advisory  Panel  all  come  from  either  the 
academic  community  or  from  private  industry.  Not  only  does  the  Panel 
review  program  results  and  experimental  designs  and  make  recom- 
mendations, but  it  also  conducts  periodic  scientific  symposia  before 
larger  groups.  A  recent  program  review  was  held  in  September  1977, 
and  a  report  on  the  review  is  in  preparation. 

The  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere 
(NAG OA) 

This  advisory  committee  was  created  by  Public  Law  92-125  on 
August  16, 1971,  and  was  to  be  advisory  to  both  the  President  and  the 
Congress  on  the  Nation's  atmospheric  and  marine  affairs  and  to  the 
Secretary  of  Commerce  with  respect  to  the  programs  of  the  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA).  Among  other 
duties,  the  committee  was  charged  with  assessing  the  status  of  U.S. 
atmospheric  and  oceanic  activities  and  with  submitting  an  annual  re- 
port of  its  findings  and  recommendations  to  the  President  and  the 
Congress.  The  Secretary  of  Commerce  was  also  required,  on  behalf  of 
the  executive  branch,  to  prepare  comments  on  the  NACOA  recom- 
mendations. These  comments  are  appended  to  each  of  the  annual 
NACOA  reports. 

As  originally  constituted  by  Public  Law  95-125,  NACOA  included 
25  members,  all  non-Federal,  appointed  by  the  President,  who  also' 
designated  one  of  the  members  as  chairman  and  one  as  vice  chairman. 
Each  department  and  agency  of  the  Federal  Government  concerned 
with  atmospheric  and  marine  matters  was  to  designate  a  senior  policy 
official  to  participate  as  observer  and  to  offer  assistance  as  required. 
The  Secretary  of  Commerce  was  to  make  available  such  staff,  person  - 

95  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Science^  Weather  Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress.  ISBN  0-309-02121-9.  Washing- 
ton, D.C.,  1973.  280  pp. 

98  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
£c.V^ce^T£e.Atmospheric  Sciences  and  Man's  Needs;  Priorities  for  the  Future.  ISBN 
0-300-01912-5.  Washington,  D.C.,  May  1971,  pp.  42-61. 

97  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council.  Board  on  Agriculture  and 
Renewable  Resources.  Climate  and  Food  ;  Climatic  Fluctuation  and  U.S.  Agricultural  Pro- 
duction. ISBN  O-309-02522-2.  Washington,  D.C..  1976  pp.  131-162 

ps  For  discussion  of  Project  Stormfury,  see  p.  296  under  weather  modification  pro-rams 
Of  the  Department  of  Commerce. 


228 


nel,  information,  and  administrative  services  as  reasonably  required 
to  carry  out  committee  activities.  The  life  of  NACOA  was  extended 
and  its  appropriation  authorization  was  increased  successively  by 
Public  Laws  92-657  and  94-69  of  October  25,  1972,  and  August  16, 
1975,  respectively.  The  1971  act  was  repealed,  however,  by  Public  Law 
95-63,  of  July  5,  1977,  which  effectively  disbanded  the  previous  com- 
mittee and  established  a  new  NACOA.  Although  many  of  the  provi- 
sions of  the  new  law  were  similar  to  the  previous  one,  the  size  of  the 
committee  was  reduced  from  25  to  18  members,  appointed  by  the 
President  .with  the  stipulation  that  members  must  be  eminently  quali- 
fied in  knowledge  and  expertise  in  areas  of  direct  concern  to  the  com- 
mittee, that  is,  in  atmospheric-  and  marine-oriented  disciplines. 

Since  its  inception,  the  posture  of  NACOA  has  been  to  concentrate 
its  studies  on  those  important  issues  where  it  can  make  a  significant 
contribution,  recognizing  that  an  attempt  to  review  and  evaluate  every 
program  and  issue  within  its  purview  of  responsibility  could  result 
in  treating  none  of  them  well  and  could  possibly  duplicate  what  others 
are  capable  of  doing  better."  Among  other  important  topics,  weather 
modification  has  been  the  subject  of  examination,  deliberation,  and 
comment  often  throughout  the  6  years  of  NACOA's  existence. 

Each  of  the  six  NACOA  annual  reports  have  contained  discussion 
and  recommendations  on  weather  modification,  which  was  one  of  the 
four  major  topics  covered  extensively  in  the  first  annual  report.1 
NACOA's  repeated  position  has  been  that  there  is  a  need  for  "a  coordi- 
nated Federal  effort  to  support  the  basic  research  needed  to  bring 
weather  modification  to  the  point  of  being  an  operational  tool  resting 
on  a  sound  technical  base"  but  that  "major  gaps  remain,  largely  be- 
cause no  one  agency  has  the  responsibility  for  identifying  and  support- 
ing those  areas  of  basic  study  needed  for  further  progress  along  a 
broad  front."  2  Specific  recommendations  of  NACOA  on  the  Federal 
weather  modification  program  will  be  discussed  in  the  following  chap- 
ter of  this  report  on  studies  and  recommendations.3 

Other  coordination  and  advisory  mechanisms 

Although  overall  coordination  of  the  Federal  weather  modification 
programs  has  been  an  ICAS  responsibility,  there  are  other  panels 
which  assist  certain  agencies  in  connection  with  major  research  proj- 
ects, and  there  have  been  various  workshops  on  particular  problem 
areas  through  which  interagency  consensus  has  been  achieved.  The 
NSF  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Panel  has  provided  important 
guidance  to  the  weather  modification  research  activities  of  the  NSF. 
The  presence  of  representatives  from  both  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation 
and  NOAA,  the  other  agencies  with  major  weather  modification  pro- 
grams, was  designed  to  assure  a  high  level  of  coordination.  The 
National  Hail  Research  Experiment  (NHRE)  Advisory  Panel  of 
the  NSF  also  has  had  representatives  from  these  two  agencies. 
Research  proposals  received  by  the  NSF  are  reviewed  by  the  Bureau 

National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere.  A  report  to  the  President  nnd 
the  Poncrres^.  First  annual  report.  June  30.  1972.  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government 
Printing  Office,  p.  iv. 
1  Ibid.,  pp.  19-29. 

:  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  nnd  Atmosphere,  a  report  to  the  President  and 
tt  <■  I  !ongre88.  sixth  annual  report.  June  30,  1977,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Print- 

lng  Office,  p.  76. 
See  Ch.  6. 


229 


of  Reclamation  and  by  NOAA,  thus  giving  a  direct  input  to  these 
agencies  in  the  decision  process  as  to  whether  individual  research  pro- 
posals are  to  be  funded  by  the  NSF.4 

The  agencies  coordinate  directly  with  each  other  at  the  working 
level  whenever  the  respective  programs  may  benefit  thereby.  A  close 
coordination  mechanism  was  established,  for  example,  between  the 
National  Hail  Research  Experiment  (NHRE)  of  the  NSF  and  the  Bu- 
reau of  Reclamation's  High  Plains  Cooperative  Program  (HIPLEX) , 
a  useful  and  practical  arrangement  in  view  of  the  geographical  prox- 
imity of  the  two  projects  in  northeastern  Colorado  and  northwestern 
Kansas,  respectively.5 

During  the  past  few  years  workshops  on  various  aspects  and  prob- 
lem areas  in  weather  modification  have  afforded  additional  oppor- 
tunity for  coordination.  In  1975  the  National  Science  Foundation  spon- 
sored a  symposium/workshop  on  the  suppression  of  hail  as  part  of  its 
National  Hail  Research  Experiment.6  The  NSF  also  sponsored  a  major 
workshop  on  inadvertent  weather  modification  at  Hartford,  Conn.,  in 
May  1977.7  Another  recent  workshop  sponsored  by  the  NSF  was 
held  in  August  1977  at  Fort  Collins.  Colo.,  on  extended  space  and  time 
effects  of  planned  weather  modification  activities.8 

Since  1967,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  has  conducted  nine  con- 
ferences as  part  of  its  "Project  Sky  water."  dealing  with  various  special 
topics  of  particular  concern  to  the  projects  and  to  planned  weather 
modification  in  general.  Some  of  these  Sky  water  conferences  have  been 
jointly  sponsored  with  other  agencies,  in  particular,  the  National 
Science  Foundation,  and  more  recent  conferences  have  been  conducted 
in  a  workshop  format.  Following  each  conference  proceedings  have 
been  published.  The  first  conference  was  held  at  Denver,  Colo.,  in  1967, 
on  the  subject  of  physics  and  chemistry  of  nucleation.9  The  most  recent 
conference  was  a  workshop,  held  in  November  1976,  at  Vail,  Colo., 
on  environmental  aspects  of  precipitation  management.10  One  day  of 
this  conference  was  sponsored  jointly  with  the  National  Science  Foun- 
dation. A  tenth  Skywater  Conference  is  a  workshop  scheduled  for 
June  1978,  at  Lake  Tahoe,  Calif.,  where  the  topic  will  be  the  Sierra 
Cooperative  Pilot  Project  of  Skywater.  This  conference  will  follow  a 
meeting  at  the  same  place,  sponsored  jointly  by  the  American  Meteoro- 
logical Society  and  the  Forest  Service  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, on  Sierra  Nevada  mountain  meteorology. 

Also  of  interest  as  a  coordination  mechanism  was  the  November 
1975,  Special  Regional  Weather  Modification  Conference  on  Augmen- 

4  Eggers.  testimony  before  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee  on 
the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  1976,  p.  110. 

5  Ibid.,  p.  111. 

6  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research,  NHRE  symposium/workshop  on  hail  and  its 
suppression,  working  group  reports.  Estes  Park.  Colo..  Sept.  21-28.  1976.  "National  Hail 
Research  Experiment."  technical  report  NCAR/7100-75/2,  November  1975,  130  pp. 

7  Robinson.  G.  D.  (Principal  Investigator),  inadvertent  weather  modification  workshop. 
May  23-27,  1977.  Hartford.  Conn.,  final  report  to  the  National  Science  Foundation,  under 
grant  No.  ENV-77-10186.  "Hartford,  the  Center  for  the  Environment  and  Man.  Inc.." 
November  1977.  CEM  Report  4215-604.  167  pp. 

s  Brown.  R>ith  J..  Robert  D.  Elliott,  and  Max  Edelstein  (editors).  "Transactions  of 
Workshop  on  Extended  Space  and  Time  Effects  of  Weather  Modification."  Aug.  8-12,  1977, 
Fort  Collins.  Colo.  Goleta,  Calif.,  North  American  weather  consultants,  February  1978 
(draft),  279  pp. 

9  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  "Phvsics  and  Cbpmistrv  of 
Nucleation."  proceedings  ;  Skywater  Conference  I,  Denver.  Colo.,  July  10-12,  1967,  Denver. 
July  1967.  419  pp. 

10  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  "Precipitation.  Man.  and  the 
Environment ;  an  Overview  of  Skywatpr  IX  Conference,"  second  week  of  November  1976, 
Vail,  Colo.,  Denver,  September  1977,  223  pp. 


r 


230 


tation  of  Winter  Orographic  Precipitation  in  the  Western  United 
States,  sponsored  jointly  by  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  the 
Department  of  Water  Resources  of  the  State  of  California,  the 
Weather  Modification  Association,  and  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.11 

In  connection  with  Project  Sky  water,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation 
has  established  a  number  of  advisory  boards  and  panels  from  time  to 
time  as  the  need  has  arisen.  These  groups  have  been  composed  of  both 
Government  and  non-Government  experts.  In  connection  with  the 
High  Plains  Cooperative  Project  (HIPLEX) ,  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion has  also  established  citizens*  panels  to  advise  on  local  problems; 
these  groups  have  included  local  government  officials  among  other  indi- 
viduals. Similar  local  advisory  groups  have  been  planned  for  the  Sierra 
Cooperative  Pilot  Project  and  are  now  being  organized. 

Another  means  of  coordination  is  provided  through  the  joint  spon- 
sorship of  some  Federal  research  efforts.  For  example,  the  weather 
modification  simulation  laboratory  at  the  Colorado  State  University, 
funded  through  the  National  Science  Foundation  by  three  Federal 
agencies,  is  a  facility  used  in  support  of  a  number  of  Federal  projects. 
The  National  Science  Foundation  has  funded  a  number  of  research 
studies  which  support  the  major  weather  modification  programs  of 
other  agencies,  particularly  those  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  and 
the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration. 

A  coordination  and  advisory  role  has  also  been  played  from  time  to 
time  by  the  committees  and  panels  which  have  been  established  to  con- 
duct major  weather  modification  policy  studies.  Notable  among  these 
groups  are  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  established 
by  Congress  in  1953,  and  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board, 
impaneled  by  the  Secretarv  of  Commerce  to  implement  requirements 
of  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976.12 

Although  not  officially  sponsored  by  the  Federal  Government,  a 
forum  for  coordination  and  exchange  of  information  on  Federal  as 
well  as  non-Federal  programs  is  provided  through  the  meetings  and 
the  journals  of  professional  organizations.  The  American  Meteorologi- 
cal Society  (AMS)  has  sponsored  six  conferences  specifically  dealing 
with  weather  modification,  at  which  the  majority  of  the  papers  de- 
livered have  been  related  to  Federal  research  projects  and  at  which 
nearly  all  of  the  papers  have  been  based  on  federally  sponsored  re- 
search. Exchange  of  information  on  Federal  projects  has  also  been 
afforded  through  the  medium  of  AMS  journals,  particularly  the  "Bul- 
letin of  the  American  Meteorology  Society"  and  the  "Journal  of 
Applied  Meteorology."  Among  the  various  specialized  AMS  commit- 
tees is  the  Committee  on  Weather  Modification,  concerned  with  ad- 
vances and  priorities  in  weather  modification  research,  the  greatest 
portion  of  which  is  supported  in  the  United  States  by  the  Federal 
agencies.  In  addition,  specialized  conferences  on  some  problem  aspects 
of  weather  modification  have  been  sponsored  by  the  AMS,  sometimes 
jointly  with  various  Federal  agencies. 

"  American  Meteorological  Society,  Abstracts  of  Special  Regional  Weather  Modification 
Conference:  Augmentation  of  Winter  Orographic  Precipitation  in  the  Western  United 
States  Nov  11  13,  1975,  San  Francisco,  Calif.  (Cosponsored  by  the  U.S.  Department 
Of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation;  State  of  California,  Department  of  Water  Re- 
potirccs  ;  and  the  Weather  Modification  Association,  Boston  (no  publication  date),  24H  nn. 

12  The  purpose,  formation,  activities,  and  recommendations  of  these  committees  are  dis- 
eussed  in  some  detail  in  various  other  places  in  this  report. 


231 


The  Weather  Modification  Association  (WMA)  sj^onsors  two  pro- 
fessional meetings  each  year,  sometimes  jointly  with  the  AMS  or  other 
professional  organizations,  and  also  published  the  "Journal  of 
Weather  Modification/'  These  WMA  mechanisms  provide  additional 
opportunities  for  coordination  of  Federal  projects  as  information  is 
exchanged  among  participants,  many  of  whom  are  employees  of  Fed- 
eral agencies  or  of  contractors  on  Federal  projects.  The  organization, 
purposes,  and  activities  of  the  AMS,  the  WMA,  and  other  nongov- 
ernmental organizations  concerned  with  weather  modification  are  dis- 
cussed under  the  section  on  private  organizations  in  chapter  8  of  this 
report.13 

Weather Modification  Ad visory  Board 

The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976,  Public  Law 
91-490  of  October  13,  1976,  requires  that  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
"shall  conduct  a  comprehensive  investigation  and  study  of  the  state  of 
scientific  knowledge  concerning  weather  modification,  the  present  state 
of  development  of  weather  modification  technology,  the  problems  im- 
peding eli'ective  implementation  of  weather  modification  technology, 
and  other  related  matters" ;  and  that  "the  Secretary  shall  prepare  and 
submit  to  the  President  and  the  Congress  *  *  *  a  final  report  on  the 
findings,  conclusions,  and  recommendations  of  the  study."'  14 

The  Secretary  of  Commerce  responded  to  these  requirements  by 
appointing  an  18-member  non-Federal  Weather  Modification  Advisory 
Board  to  conduct  the  study  and  prepare  a  report  recommending  a  na- 
tional weather  modification  policy  and  a  national  program  of  research 
and  action  to  carry  out  the  policy.  Members  of  the  Advisory  Board, 
with  their  affiliations,  and  the  charter  to  the  Board  from  the  Secretary 
are  included  in  appendix  K.  The  Board's  final  draft  report  is  to  be 
submitted  to  the  Secretary  for  her  approval  and  any  necessary  modifi- 
cations, after  which  it  will  be  transmitted  to  the  President  and  the 
Congress. 

Owing  to  the  1976  Presidential  election  and  change  of  administra- 
tion in  January  1977.  and  because  of  procedures  required  by  the  Fed- 
eral Advisory  Committee  Act.  the  Advisory  Board  was  not  officially 
appointed  until  April  1977.  Consequently,  much  of  the  1-year  allotted 
time  for  the  study  had  been  lost  and  it  was  apparent  that  the  report 
could  not  be  completed  by  October  13,  1977,  as  required  by  Public  Law 
94-490.  An  extension  of  time,  requested  by  the  Secretary,  was  trans- 
mitted to  both  houses  of  the  Congress,  and  a  bill  providing  for  such  an 
extension  was  introduced  in  the  Senate,15  but  no  action  has  been  taken 
to  date,  and  formal  action  by  the  Congress  to  extend  the  time  for  com- 
pletion of  the  study  seems  unlikely.  Meanwhile,  the  Advisory  Board 
continued  its  study  and  report  development,  planning  to  deliver  its 
report  to  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  by  June  30,  1978.  Following 
public  hearings  and  receipt  of  comments  from  other  executive  branch 
agencies,  it  is  anticipated  that  the  Secretary  will  transmit  the  docu- 
ment to  the  Congress  in  the  late  summer  or  fall  of  1978. 16 

u  SpP  d.  389. 

14  Public  Law  94-490.  Sees.  4  and  5.  (The  complete  text  of  the  law  is  included  in  app.  I.) 
»S.  1938,  introduced  Jnly  27.  1077.  by  Sen.  Warren  G.  Masrnuson. 

18  This  tentative  schedule  for  completion  and  transmittal  of  the  report  is  based  on  dis- 
cussions by  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  at  its  ninth  meeting.  Apr.  4,  197S,  in 
Washington.  D.C. 


232 


The  Advisory  Board  has  met  formally  four  times  in  Washington, 
D.C.,  and  one  time  each  in  North  Forks,  N.  Dak.;  Boulder,  Colo.; 
Champaign,  111.;  San  Francisco,  Calif.;  Chicago,  111.;  Tulsa,  Okla. ; 
Atlanta,  Ga. ;  and  Aspen,  Colo. — combining  public  hearings  with 
working  sessions.  Subpanels  and  other  ad  hoc  groups  of  Board 
members  have  also  met  numerous  times  to  work  on  specific  aspects  of 
the  study  and  to  prepare  draft  sections  of  the  report.  At  a  hearing  on 
October  26,  1977,  the  Chairman  of  the  Advisory  Board,  Harlan 
Cleveland,  briefed  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the 
Atmosphere  of  the  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  re- 
lating activities  to  date  of  the  Board  and  submitting  for  the  record  a 
discussion  paper  which  summarized  the  Board's  thinking  at  the  time.17 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  REPORTING  PROGRAM 

Background  and  regulations 

Public  Law  92-205  of  December  18,  1971,18  requires  reporting 
of  basic  information  on  all  nonfederally  sponsored  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  in  the  United  States  and  its  territories  to  the  Secretary 
of  Commerce.  The  Secretary  is  further  directed  to  maintain  a  record 
of  weather  modification  activities  taking  place  in  the  United  States 
and  to  publish  summaries  of  such  information  "from  time  to  time." 

Within  the  Commerce  Department  the  National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA)  has  administered  this  pro- 
gram on  behalf  of  the  Secretary.  Rules  for  carrying  out  the  provisions 
of  this  legislation,  published  in  the  Federal  Register,19  went  into  effect 
on  November  1,  1972.  The  rules  have  since  been  revised  and  amended 
twice — on  February  15,  1974,20  to  cover  safety  and  environmental 
aspects  of  field  activities  and  to  consider  possible  interference  with 
Federal  research  projects,  and  again  on  July  4,  1976,21  to  modify  cer- 
tain reporting  procedures.  A  copy  of  the  rules  and  regulations  cur- 
rently in  effect  appears  in  appendix  L.  In  the  same  appendix  are 
copies  of  the  forms  and  specific  reporting  instructions  to  be  used  for 
submission  of  required  information  to  NOAA  by  weather  modifica- 
tion operators. 

Reporting  requirements  include  initial,  interim,  and  final  reports. 
It  is  required  that  NOAA  receive  the  initial  report  at  least  10  days 
prior  to  the  commencement  of  weather  modification  activities.  The 
rules  provide  for  exceptions  whereby  this  10-day  rule  may  be  waived 
under  certain  emergencies  and  also  require  filing  a  supplemental  report 
if  the  initial  report  is  subsequently  found  to  contain  inaccuracies,  mis- 
statements, or  omissions  or  if  project  plans  are  changed.  The  interim 
report  is  required  January  1  of  each  year  (October  1  prior  to  the  1976 
revision  of  the  rules)  unless  the  project  has  been  terminated  prior  to 
that  date.  Upon  completion  of  the  project,  a  final  report  is  due,  and, 

17  Weather  Modification  Advisory  P,oard.  "A  U.S.  Policy  To  Enhance  the  Atmospheric 
Environment,"  a  discussion  paper.  Oct.  21.  1977,  29  pp.  (Also  appeared  In  record  of 
hearing:  TVS.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives.  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology, 
Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  Weather  Modification.  95th 
Cong.,  1st  sess.  Oct.  21,  1977,  pp.  20-49. 

18  See  appendix  I  for  a  reproduction  of  Public  Law  92-205  and  see  earlier  section  of  this 
chapter  under  congressional  activities  for  discussion  of  enactment  of  this  law  and  those 
enacted  since  which  have  extended  appropriations  authorization  through  fiscal  year  1980. 

19  Federal  Register,  vol.  37.  No.  208.  Friday,  Oct.  27.  1972. 
^Federal  Register,  vol.  39,  No.  10,  Tuesday.  Jan.  15,  1974. 
21  Federal  Register,  vol.  41.  No.  113.  June  10,  1976. 


233 


until  such  final  report  is  received  by  XOAA,  the  project  is  considered 
active.22 

Reporting  of  Federal  activities 

Although  not  required  to  do  so  by  Public  Law  92-205,  as  of  Novem- 
ber 1,  1973,  Federal  agencies  also  began  reporting  to  NOAA  their 
experimental  activities  in  weather  modification.  This  procedure  re- 
sulted from  an  agreement  obtained  by  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
from  the  responsible  agencies  at  the  request  of  the  Interdepartmental 
Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS)  and  the  Office  of  Man- 
agement and  Budget.  Reporting  guidelines  adopted  for  Federal 
agencies  are  similar  to  those  for  non-Federal  projects,  using  the  same 
data  forms;  however,  Federal  entities  and  employees  thereof  are  ex- 
cepted from  criminal  penalty  to  which  other  operators  are  subject  for 
noncompliance,  and  no  Federal  agency  is  required  to  furnish  infor- 
mation or  material  whose  protection  is  in  the  interest  of  national 
security.  With  similar  reporting  of  federally  and  nonfederally  spon- 
sored activities,  there  now  exists  a  central  source  of  information  on  all 
weather  modification  projects  in  the  United  States.23 

Summary  reports  on  U.S.  weather  modification  activities 

Since  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  was  given  responsibility  for  col- 
lecting information  on  weather  modification  activities  and  for  pub- 
lishing "from  time  to  time"  summaries  of  this  information,  four  such 
summary  reports  have  been  prepared  by  the  Environmental  Modifica- 
tion Office  of  NOAA's  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and  Pre- 
diction. The  first  summary  covered  reported  projects  which  were  active 
some  time  between  November  1, 1972,  and  March  22, 1973.24  The  second 
report  incorporated  information  published  in  the  first  summary  and 
extended  the  period  of  coverage  to  include  activities  reported  through 
December  1973. 25  Subsequent  reports  summarized  information  on 
ongoing  weather  modification  projects  underway  during  calendar  years 
1974 26  and  1975,27  respectively.  The  latter  two  summaries  include 
information  on  Federal  as  well  as  non-Federal  projects  for  the  com- 
plete calendar  years. 

An  analysis  of  the  weather  modification  activities  conducted  in  the 
United  States  during  calendar  year  1975  and  a  preliminary  analysis 
of  activities  during  calendar  years  1976  and  1977  are  found  in  chap- 
ter 7  of  this  report.  These  discussions  are  based  upon  the  latest  weather 
modification  summary  report  published  by  NOAA  28  and  a  prelimi- 
nary report  on  the  latter  2  years  prepared  by  Charak.29 

-  Charak,  Mason  T..  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  :  Calendar  Year  1975."  Na- 
tional Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and 
Prediction,  Rockville.  Md.,  June  1976,  pp.  3  and  60. 

23  Charak,  Mason  T.  and  Mary  T.  DiGiulian,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  ; 
Nov.  1,  1972,  to  Dec.  31,  1973."  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration, 
Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and  Prediction,  Rockville,  Md..  March  1974,  pp. 
1  and  D-l. 

24  Charak,  Mason  T.  and  Mary  T.  DiGiulian,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  ; 
November  1.  1972.  to  March  22.  1973.''  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration, 
Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and  Prediction.  Rockville,  Md..  March  1973.  23  pp. 

25  Charak  and  DiGiulian.  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports ;  Nov.  1,  1972  to 
Dec.  31,  1973,"  1974.  40  pp. 

26  Charak.  Mason  T.,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  ;  Calendar  Tear  1974."  Na- 
tional Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and 
Production,  Rockville,  Md.  March  1975,  37  pp. 

^Charak,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports;  Calendar  Year  1975."  June  1976, 
64  pp. 

25  Ibid. 

29  Charak.  Mason  T..  "Preliminary  Analvsis  of  Reported  Weather  Modification  Activities 
In  the  U.S.  for  CY  1976  and  1977."  (Submitted  for  publication  in  the  Journal  of  Weather 
Modification,  1978.) 


234 


It  should  also  be  noted  that,  as  part  of  its  responsibilities  as  lead 
agency-  for  weather  modification  under  Public  Law  85-510,  the  Na- 
tional Science  Foundation  (NSF)  began  collecting  reports  on  weather 
modification  activities  on  a  regular  basis  in  1966.  Two  years  later,  how- 
ever, Public  Law  90-407  repealed  the  powers  of  the  NSF  to  require 
such  reporting.  During  those  2  years,  the  Foundation  published  sum- 
maries of  reported  activities  for  fiscal  years  1967  and  1968,  which  were 
included  in  the  9th  and  10th  annual  NSF  weather  modification  re- 
ports that  were  submitted  to  the  President  and  the  Congress.30  From 
September  1,  196S,  until  December  18,  1971,  when  Public  Law  92-205 
was  enacted,  no  Federal  department  or  agency  was  authorized  to  col- 
lect reports  on  weather  modification  activities.  During  this  interim, 
pertinent  information  on  weather  modification  activities  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government  and  on  the  status  of  Aveather  modification  research 
and  technology  was  published  in  three  weather  modification  summary 
reports,  published  at  the  request  of  the  ICAS  by  NOAA.31  This  brief 
series  ended  with  the  report  which  covered  fiscal  year  1973 ;  however, 
some  of  the  kinds  of  information  contained  in  these  reports  will  be 
included  in  the  NOAA  summary  reports  on  weather  modification 
activities ;  such  material  was  first  so  included  in  the  summary  for  cal- 
endar year  1975.32 

FEDERAL  STUDIES  AND  REPORTS  OX  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

Introduction 

In  accordance  with  the  mandates  of  several  public  laws,  or  self- 
initiated  by  the  agencies  or  interagency  committees,  the  executive 
branch  of  the  Federal  Government  lias  undertaken  a  number  of  major 
studies  over  the  past  25  years  on  weather  modification  policy  and/or 
recommended  programs  for  research  and  development.  Some  of  these 
studies  have  been  performed  under  contract,  others  have  been  con- 
ducted by  committees  of  Federal  employees,  while  a  third  group  were 
carried  out  by  Federal  committees  or  panels  composed  of  non-Govern- 
ment experts.  Each  of  the  completed  major  studies  was  followed  by  a 
report  which  included  findings  and  recommendations. 

The  earliest  studies  were  conducted  in  the  early  1950's,  largely  at  the 
instigation  of  the  Department  of  Defense,  at  that  time  the  agency  with 
the  major  Federal  role  in  weather  modification.  The  most  significant 
study  and  report  of  the  1950's  was  that  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Weather  Control,  directed  by  Public  Law  83-256.  There  was  an  un- 
usually large  number  of  major  studies  conducted  and  reports  issued 
during  the  period  from  1965  through  1976.  The  reports  included  two 
from  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  two  from  the  Interdepart- 

80  National  Science  Foundation.  "Weather  Modification  :  Ninth  Annual  Report  for  Fiscal 
Fear  Ended  June  HO,  1967."  NSF  68-21.  Aug  28.  1968.  Washington.  D.C..  U.S.  Govt.  Print. 

Off.,  Aug.  28,  1968,  pp.  75-77  :  and   .  "Weather  Modification  ;  Tenth  Annual  Report 

for  Fiscal  Year  Ended  June  30,  196S,"  NSF  69-18,  Washington.  D.C.,  U.S.  Govt.  Print. 
Off..  Aug.  1969,  pp.  111-115. 

31  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration. 
"Summary  Report:  Weather  Modification  ;  Fiscal  Years  1969.  1970.  1971."  Office  of  the 
Assistant  Administrator  for  Environmental  Modification.  Rockville,  Md..  May  1973.  163  pp.  : 
 .  "Summary  Report :  Weather  Modification  ;  Fiscal  Year  1972."  Office  of  Environmen- 
tal Monitoring  and  Prediction,  Rockville.  Md.,  November  1973.  226  pp.  :  and   .  "Sum- 
mary Report  :  Weather  Modification  ;  Fiscal  Year  1973."  Office  of  Environmental  Monitor- 
ing and  Prediction.  Rockville.  Md..  December  1974.  155  pp. 

32Cbarak,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  ;  Calendar  Year  1975,"  June  1976,  pp. 
37-54. 


235 


mental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS),  three  from  the 
National  Science  Foundation,  and  at  least  one  each  from  the  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  the  Environmental  Science  Services  Administra- 
tion (predecessor  of  XOAA),  and  the  Domestic  Council's  Subcom- 
mittee on  Climate  Change.  In  1966  alone,  at  least  five  reports  on 
federally  sponsored  weather  modification  studies  appeared.  The  Na- 
tional Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere  (NACOA) 
has  also  issued  policy  statements  on  weather  modification  in  each  of  its 
six  annual  reports  to  date. 

The  most  recent  major  study  was  undertaken  in  1977  by  the  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board  under  the  auspices  of  the  Department  of 
Commerce,  which  has  been  directed  to  conduct  such  a  policy  study  and 
to  submit  a  report  to  the  Congress  in  accordance  with  the  National 
Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976  (Public  Law  94-490). 

The  principal  weather  modification  studies  and  reports,  sponsored 
by  the  executive  branch  are  discussed  very  briefly  in  the  following  sub- 
sections.33 The  conclusions  and  recommendations  of  the  major  policy 
studies  are  discussed  and  summarized  in  a  separate  chapter  of  this 
report.34 

Studies  of  the  early  1950' s 

In  1950,  there  were  controversies  among  scientists  over  the  validity 
of  reported  results  from  weather  modification  experiments,  notably 
Project  Cirrus,  a  Defense  Department  project,  conducted  primarly  by 
the  General  Electric  Company  under  contract.35  It  was  agreed  by  those 
involved  that  there  should  be  an  independent  scientific  review  of  the 
work  and  the  claims  of  spectacular  results.  The  appointed  review  com- 
mittee was  organized  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Department  of 
Defense,  since  Project  Cirrus  was  sponsored  by  that  Department,  with 
Dr.  Bernard  Haurwitz  of  New  York  University  as  chairman.  The 
committee  was  to  investigate  results  and  report  to  the  Defense  Depart- 
ment; however,  when  the  report  was  submitted  in  the  late  spring  of 
1950,  it  was  classified  "confidential,"  to  the  dismay  of  committee  mem- 
bers, since  it  had  been  hoped  that  the  report  would  explain  the  real 
prospects  of  weather  modification  to  the  public.36  According  to  Byers, 
the  Defense  Department  finally  agreed  to  let  the  report  be  published 
by  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  and  it  appeared  "in  the  guise 
of  a  report  requested  by  the  president  of  the  Society."  37-  38  The  overall 
tenor  of  the  report  was  one  of  skepticism  toward  the  claims  of  success 
for  Project  Cirrus,  and  the  concluding  paragraph  of  the  report  stated 
that : 

It  is  the  considered  opinion  of  this  committee  that  the  possibility  of  artificially 
producing  any  useful  amounts  of  rain  has  not  been  demonstrated  so  far  if  the 
available  evidence  is  interpreted  by  any  acceptable  scientific  standards.38 

In  view  of  the  potential  value  of  weather  modification  techniques  and 
the  controversial  results  obtained  thus  far,  the  research  agencies  of  the 

33  Studies  and  reports  of  the  congressional  support  agencies  have  been  noted  earlier  in 
this  chapter  under  the  discussion  of  congressional  weather  modification  activities.  See 
p.  209. 

34  See  chap.  6,  p.  313  ff. 

85  For  a  discussion  of  Project  Cirrus,  see  p.  39,  under  the  history  of  weather  modification 
in  chapter  2. 

36  Byers,  Horace  W.,  "History  of  Weather  Modification,"  In  Wilmot  H.  Hess  (editor). 
Weather  and  Climate  Modification.  New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  pp.  33-34. 

37  Ibid.,  p.  34. 

38  The  report  appeared  under  correspondence,  signed  by  members  of  the  committee,  in  the 
Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  31,  No.  9,  November  1950.  pp.  346-347 

39  Ibid  .  p.  347. 


236 


U.S.  Army,  Navy,  and  Air  Force,  along  with  the  U.S.  Weather  Bureau, 
in  1951  appointed  an  Artificial  Cloud  Nucleation  Advisory  Group, 
chaired  by  Dr.  Sverre  Petterssen  of  the  University  of  Chicago.  The 
Advisory  Group  was  asked  to  make  a  survey  of  the  field  of  weather 
modification  and  u.  .  .  to  recommend  a  program  for  experiments  and 
tests  that  could  be  expected  to  clarify  major  uncertainties  that  existed 
at  that  time  for  the  operational  uses  of  weather  modification  tech- 
niques." The  Advisory  Group  found  some  support  for  the  claims  of 
Langmuir  that  seeding  had  affected  larger  atmospheric  systems,  but 
emphasized  the  need  for  clarification  experiments.  The  group  con- 
cluded that  there  was  good  evidence  to  indicate  that  cold  stratus  (and 
presumably  cold  fog)  could  be  dispelled  by  nucleation.  It  had  not  been 
possible  in  any  case  to  predict  what  results  would  have  occurred  if 
seeding  had  not  been  performed,  indicating  the  need  for  more  rigorous 
control  of  future  tests.  The  Advisory  Group  consulted  a  number  of 
experts  in  the  field  and  all  agreed  that  there  was  need  for  a  coordinated 
program  for  experiments  in  order  to  determine  whether  or  not  weather 
systems  can  be  modified  with  useful  results.40 

The  Advisory  Group  recommended  establishment  of  six  projects  to 
answer  these  questions  and  was  requested  to  remain  and  furnish  advice 
to  the  projects  and  their  sponsoring  agencies,  provide  for  information 
exchange,  and  review  results.  One  of  these  projects  was  sponsored  by 
the  Weather  Bureau,  and  of  the  five  sponsored  by  the  Defense  Depart- 
ment, four  were  conducted  by  contractors  and  the  fifth  by  the  Army 
Signal  Corps  in  house.  In  July  195±  the  Advisory  Group  met  with 
representatives  of  all  the  projects  and  sponsoring  agencies,  reviewed 
the  results  in  detail,  and  recommended  that  full  reports  on  each  proj- 
ect be  published.  Project  results  were  subsequently  reported  in  a  1957 
monograph  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society.41 

Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control 

The  first  major  comprehensive  study  of  weather  modification  and 
its  ramifications  was  undertaken  by  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Weather  Control,  following  the  congressional  mandate  under  Public 
Law  83-256,  of  August  13, 1953,  which  established  the  Committee  and 
directed  that  the  study  and  evaluation  of  weather  modification  be  per- 
formed. The  Committee  was  comprised  of  the  Secretaries  of  five  de- 
partments and  the  Director  of  the  National  Science  Foundation,  or 
their  designees,  and  five  private  members,  including  the  Chairman, 
who  were  appointed  by  the  President.42  Chaired  by  Dr.  Howard  T. 
Orville,  the  Committee  forwarded  its  two-volume  report 43  to  Presi- 
dent Eisenhower  on  December  31,  1 0r>7,  after  the  June  30,  1956,  termi- 
nation date  for  the  act  had  been  extended  by  Public  Law  84—664  of 
July  9.  1950.  In  its  final  report  the  committee  recommended : 44 

(1)  That  encouragement  be  given  for  the  widest  possible  competent 
research  in  meteorology  and  related  fields.  Such  research  should  be 

4  Petterssen.  Sverre.  "Reports  on  Experiments  with  Artificial  Cloud  Nucleation  :  Intro- 
ductory Note."  In  Sverre  Petterssen.  Jerome  Spar.  Ferguson  Hall,  Roscoe  R.  Braham,  Jr., 
!    lis  J.  Rattan.  Horace  R.  Byers.  H.  J.  aufm  Kampe,  J.  J.  Kelly,  and  H.  K.  Weickmann. 
Cloud  and  Weather  Modification:  a  Group  of  Field  Experiments.  Meteorologieil  mono- 
hs,  vol.  2.  No.  11.  American  Meteorological  Society,  Boston,  July  1957.  pp.  2-3. 
Ibid,,  115  pp. 
43  Public  Law  83-256,  sections  4  and  5. 

Arlvisorv  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  final  report  of  thp  Advisory  Committee  on 
Wp.itbf>r  Control,  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1958,  in  two  volumes, 
22-422  pp. 

«  Ibid.,  vol.  I.  pp.  vll-viii. 


237 


undertaken  by  Government  agencies,  universities,  industries,  and  other 
organizations. 

(2)  That  the  Government  sponsor  meteorological  research  more 
vigorously  than  at  present.  Adequate  support  is  particularly  needed  to 
maintain  continuity  and  reasonable  stability  for  long-term  projects. 

(3)  That  the  administration  of  Government-sponsored  research  pro- 
vide freedom  and  latitude  for  choosing  methods  and  goals.  Emphasis 
should  be  put  on  sponsoring  talented  men  as  well  as  their  specihc 
projects. 

(4)  That  an  agency  be  designated  to  promote  and  support  research 
in  the  needed  fields,  and  to  coordinate  research  projects,  it  should  also 
constitute  a  central  point  for  the  assembly,  evaluation,  and  dissemina- 
tion of  information.  This  agency  should  be  the  National  Science 
Foundation. 

(5)  That  whenever  a  research  project  has  the  endorsement  of  the 
National  Science  Foundation  and  requires  facilities  to  achieve  its  pur- 
pose, the  agency  having  jurisdiction  over  such  facilities  should  pro- 
vide them. 

National  Academy  of  Sciences  studies 

The  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences  of  the  National  Academy 
of  Sciences  (NAS/CAS)  produced  its  report  on  the  first  of  two  major 
studies  on  weather  modification  in  1966.  The  report,  entitled  "Weather 
and  Climate  Modification :  Problems  and  Prospects,'' 45  was  prepared 
by  the  Committee's  Panel  on  Weather  and  Climate  Modification,  with 
joint  support  from  the  National  Science  Foundation  and  the  Com- 
merce Department's  Environmental  Science  Services  Administration. 
Volume  1  of  the  report  contains  a  summary  of  the  study  and  recom- 
mendations, while  the  second  volume  presents  a  general  assessment  of 
the  subject,  on  which  the  panel  based  its  conclusions  and  recommenda- 
tions. The  report  expressed  cautious  optimism  regarding  the  future  of 
weather  modification.  Among  its  recommendations  were  an  increase 
in  Federal  support  from  the  1965  level  of  $5  million  to  at  least  $30 
million  by  1970  and  the  early  establishment  of  several  carefully  de- 
signed, randomized  seeding  experiments,  planned  in  such  a  way  as  to 
permit  assessment  of  the  seedability  of  various  storm  types.  The  re- 
port addressed  mostly  technical  and  administrative  problems;  it  did 
not  consider  social,  legal,  and  economic  aspects  of  the  subject,  since 
these  topics  were  taken  up  in  a  concurrent  study  by  the  NSF's  Special 
Commission  on  Weather  Modification,  which  worked  closely  with  the 
NAS  panel.46 

The  second  major  study  was  completed  by  the  Panel  on  Weather 
and  Climate  Modification  of  the  NAS  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences  in  1973. 47  Sponsored  jointly  by  the  National  Science  Founda- 
tion and  the  Department  of  Commerce,  the  panel  was  given  respon- 
sibility in  the  study  "(1)  to  determine  the  scientific  and  national  prog- 
ress in  weather  modification  since  the  earlier  study  of  the  field  was 
reported  upon  in  1966,  (2)  to  consider  future  activities  that  would 


45  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council,  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences.  Wenther  and  Climate  Modification  :  Problems  and  Prospects.  Publication  No.  1350, 
Washington.  D.C.,  1966.  in  2  volumes.  40+212  pp. 

46  See  discussion  be^w  on  reports  bv  the  National  Science  Foundation,  p.  239. 

47  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  National  Research  Council,  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  "Weather  Modification  :  Problems  and  Progress,"  ISBN  0-309-02121-9,  Washing- 
ton, D.C.,  1973.  280  pp. 


238 


guide  and  strengthen  work  toward  further  progress,  (3)  to  examine 
and  clarify  the  statistical  design  and  evaluation  of  modification  ac- 
tivities, and  (4)  to  determine  the  current  circumstances  bearing  on  the 
increase,  decrease,  and  redistribution  of  precipitation."  48  In  its  report, 
the  panel  attempted  to  fufill  these  objectives  and  further  proposed 
the  following  three  goals  for  improving  the  science  and  technology  of 
weather  modification : 49 

1.  Completion  of  research  to  put  precipitation  modification  on  a 
sound  basis  by  1980. 

2.  Development  during  the  next  decade  of  the  technology  required 
to  move  toward  mitigation  of  severe  storms. 

3.  Establishment  of  a  program  that  will  permit  determination  by 
1980  of  the  extent  of  inadvertent  modification  of  local  weather  and 
global  climate  as  a  result  of  human  activities. 

Research  programs  required  to  achieve  these  goals  were  outlined 
along  with  basic  functions  to  be  performed  by  the  several  Federal  agen- 
cies. These  organizational  recommendations  for  the  Federal  program 
were :  "  (1)  the  identification  of  a  lead  agency,  (2)  the  establishment  of 
a  laboratory  dedicated  to  the  achievement  of  the  proposed  national 
goals,  and  (3)  assignment  to  the  recently  established  National  Advisory 
Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere  of  the  responsibility  for  examin- 
ing the  public  policy  issues  of  weather  modification,  as  well  as  the 
development  of  organization  and  legislative  proposals."' 50 

Studies  by  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences 
(WAS) 

Another  report  to  appear  in  1966  was  the  first  of  two  by  the  ICAS 
on  weather  modification,  which  prescribed  a  recommended  national 
program  in  the  field.51  Compiled  by  the  chairman  of  the  ICAS  Select 
Panel  on  Weather  Modification,  Dr.  Homer  E.  Newell  of  the  National 
Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration,  the  report  laid  out  details  for 
such  a  national  program  and  contained,  as  appendices,  the  earlier 
recommended  program  of  the  ICAS  Select  Panel  itself,  as  well  as 
recommendations  from  the  concurrent  studies  by  the  NAS  and  the 
NSF  Special  Commission. 

The  ICAS  completed  another  interagency  study  in  1971,  when  it 
produced  a  report  which  outlines  a  program  for  accelerating  national 
progress  in  weather  modification.52  The  report  attempted  to  identify 
national  weather  modification  needs  and  designated  research  projects 
for  meeting  these  needs  as  national  projects,  each  with  a  responsible 
lead  agency  and  support  from  other  Federal  agencies.53  Some  of  these 
projects  were  already  underway  or  in  planning  stages  by  various 
agencies.  Few  were  ever  consummated  as  truly  interagency  national 
projects  as  envisioned,  though  there  was  some  degree  of  cooperation 
in  some,  such  as  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  (NHRE), 


*8  Ibid.,  p.  ill. 
*»  Ibid.,  p.  xv. 

«  Newell,  Homer  E.,  "A  Recommended  National  Program  in  Weather  Modification,"  Fed- 
eral Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  ICAS  Kept.  No.  10a,  November  1966,  93  pp. 

52  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interagency  Committee  for  Atmospheric 
Sciences,  "A  National  Program  for  Accelerating  Progress  in  Weather  Modification,  ICAS 
Kept.  No.  15a.  June  1971,  50  pp.  „  .    21..Aa  00.  . 

M  For  a  list  of  the  seven  national  projects  identified  by  the  ICAS,  see  p.  224.  under  the 
discussion  of  the  activities  of  the  ICAS. 


239 


and  others,  such  as  Interior's  Colorado  River  Basin  pilot  project 
(CKBPP),  continued  essentially  as  large  single-agency  projects. 

Domestic  Council  study 

A  weather  modification  study  was  undertaken  in  1974,  following 
establishment  of  a  Subcommittee  on  Climate  Change  by  the  Environ- 
mental Eesources  Committee  of  the  Domestic  Council.  Comprised  of 
representatives  from  the  Office  of  Management  and  Budget  (OMB) 
and  most  Federal  agencies  with  atmospheric  sciences  programs,  except- 
ing the  Defense  Department,  the  subcommittee  attempted  to  assess  the 
Federal  role  in  weather  modification.  Drawing  upon  recent  documenta- 
tion on  the  progress,  status,  and  problems  in  the  field,  and  through  a  2- 
day  hearing  of  representatives  from  various  parts  of  the  weather  modi- 
fication community  and  other  interested  groups,  the  subcommittee 
prepared  its  report  in  1975.54  In  its  executive  summary,  the  Domestic 
Council  report  found  that : 

Weather  modification  represents  a  potential  tool  for  exerting  a  favorable  influ- 
ence over  destructive  weather  events  and  for  augmenting  water  supplies  in  some 
areas  where  additional  water  is  needed  for  energy,  food,  and  fiber  production ; 55 

and  the  following  general  recommendation  was  formulated : 

A  policy  should  be  adopted  to  develop,  encourage,  and  maintain  a  comprehen- 
sive and  coordinated  national  program  in  weather  modification  research  and  in 
the  beneficial  application  of  the  technology  along  the  lines  of  the  recommenda- 
tions embodied  in  this  report.56 

Specific  findings  and  recommendations  were  also  given  for  each  of 
the  three  areas  of  research,  operations,  and  regulation,  which  the  sub- 
committee examined.57 

Policy  and  planning  reports  produced  by  Federal  agencies 

Since  the  very  early  studies  of  the  1950-51  era,  instigated  primarily 
by  the  Department  of  Defense,  other  Federal  agencies  have  undertaken 
major  policy  and  planning  studies,  either  as  "in-house"  efforts  or 
through  contractors  or  committees  established  by  the  agency. 

The  National  Science  Foundation  has  produced  the  greatest  num- 
ber of  agency  policy  reports,  based  on  studies  conducted  by  its  Special 
Commission  on  Weather  Modification  and  by  contractors.  Two  reports 
appearing  in  1966  were  prepared  by  or  under  auspices  of  the  Special 
Commission,  culminating  a  study  authorized  in  October  1963  by  the 
National  Science  Board.58, 59  The  Special  Commission,  established  in 
June  1964  and  chaired  by  Dr.  A.  R.  Chamberlain  of  Colorado  State 
University,  had  been  "*  *  *  requested  to  examine  the  physical, 
bilogical,  legal,  social,  and  political  aspects  of  the  field  and  make  rec- 
ommendations concerning  future  policies  and  programs."  60  Phvsical 
aspects  were  studied  in  cooperative  liaison  with  the  NAS  panel  in  its 
concurrent  study ; 61  however,  the  membership  of  the  Special  Commis- 
sion reflected  expertise  in  the  other  aspects  of  weather  modification  not 

64  Domestic  Council.  Environmental  Resources  Committee.  Subcommittee  on  Climate 
Change,  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification,"  Washington,  D.C.,  December  1975, 
39  pp. 

55  Ibid.,  p.  i. 

»  Ibid. 

wIbid..  pp.  i-iii. 

68  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  NSF  66-3.  1966.  155  pp. 

59  Taubenfeld.  Howard  J.  "Weather  Modification:  Law.  Controls.  Operations."  report  to 
the  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  National  Science  Foundation,  NSF  66-7, 
Washington.  D.C..  1966.  79  pp. 

*>  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  NSF  66-3,  1966,  p.  iii. 

61  See  p.  237  above. 


240 


previously  addressed  by  the  other  studies.  Much  of  the  background 
work  for  the  treatment  of  these  other  aspects  of  the  problem  was  sup- 
ported by  NSF  grants  and  subsequently  published  as  separate  reports. 
These  included  the  biological  aspects,  human  dimensions,  international 
relations,  and  legal  aspects.  Of  these  separate  studies  all  were  published 
in  various  nongovernmental  media,  except  the  last  one,  which  appeared 
in  the  format  of  the  XSF  Special  Commission  report.62  All  of  these 
aspects  were  reviewed  and  summarized,  and  recommendations  were 
presented,  in  the  principal  Commission  report,  which  sought  to  answer 
the  following  question :  "With  the  physical  possibility  of  modifying 
the  weather  and  climate  already  partly  demonstrated,  how  by  artifi- 
cially inducing  deliberate  changes  in  the  environment  may  man  act  to 
control  or  develop  changes  in  the  atmosphere  considered  to  be  desirable 
by  society  ?" 63 

A  contracted  study  was  undertaken  for  the  NSF  by  the  Rand  Corp. 
in  1962  to  establish  the  framework  of  a  cohesive  approach  to  research 
on  weather  modification.  Part  of  the  program  was  to  conduct  a  com- 
prehensive state-of-the-art  review  of  the  field:  however,  the  appear- 
ance of  the  1966  National  Academy  study  64  negated  the  immediate  ne- 
cessity for  such  a  reexamination.  Nearly  3  years  later  Rand  did  publish 
such  a  review,  recognizing  that  there  had  been  "sufficient  progre-s  in 
the  overall  field  of  weather  modification  research  to  now  warrant  a  new 
overview."  65 

The  authors  of  the  report  stressed  the  following  points:  "(1)  the 
possibility  of  inadvertent  weather  or  climate  modification  is  rapidly 
becoming  a  probability,  as  human  effects  on  the  atmosphere  and  the 
surface  of  the  planet  grow  at  an  increasing  rate:  (2)  progress  in 
weather  modification  research  continues  to  be  hampered  by  the  preva- 
lent lack  of  cohesive  effort  by  both  theoreticians  and  experimenters; 
(3)  computers  of  advanced  design  and  increased  capacity  will  handle 
atmospheric  models  of  considerably  greater  sophistication  than  in  the 
past;  and  (-1)  this  is  a  not-to-be-neglected  opportunity  for  interactive 
research — constant  two-way  feedback  from  theory  to  experiment  to 
theory,  with  dynamic  atmospheric  models  facilitating  each  advance."  66 
General  and  specific  recommendations  concerning  what  they  consid- 
ered to  be  the  most  urgently  needed  research  areas  and  required  instru- 
mentation developments  were  included  in  the  report. 

In  1965,  following  a  request  from  the  Chief  of  the  U.S.  Weather 
Bureau,  Dr.  Robert  M.  White,  the  Bureau  published  an  "in-house" 
report  on  its  role  in  weather  modification  research.07  In  the  report  it 
was  recognized  thai  research  responsibilities  extend  beyond  considera- 
tion of  scientific  and  technical  problems;  however,  it  dealt  primarily 
with  meteorology,  leaving  to  other  ongoing  studies  the  treatment  of 
administrative,  'military,  international,  and  ecological  aspects,  al- 
though some  legal  and  legislative  questions  were  discussed.r,s  It  was 

02  Taubenfeld,  NSF  66-7.  „    -m        _  _ 

°3  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  XSF  66-3.  1966,  pp.  7-8. 
•*  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  publication  Xo.  1350,  1966. 

«  Staff  of  the  Weather  Modification  Research  Project  of  the  Rand  Corn  .  Weather  Modi- 
fication Progress  and  the  Need  for  Interactive  Research."  The  Rand  Corp.,  memorandum 
RM-5835-NSF.  Santa  Monica.  Calif.,  October  1968,  88  pp. 

^GdVman  Y)onald  L.,  .Tames  R.  Hibbs.  and  Paul  I,.  Lnskin.  "Weather  and  Climate  Morti- 
fication," a"  report  to  the  Chief.  U.S.  Weather  Bureau.  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce, 
Weather  Bureau,  Washington,  D.C,  July  10,  1965,  46  pp. 

«  Ibid.,  p.  1. 


241 


made  clear  that  the  report  was  not  intended  to  be  statement  of  policy 
of  the  Bureau,  the  Commerce  Department,  or  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, but  was  rather  to  be  considered  as  a  contribution  to  the  national 
discussion  of  the  future  direction  of  weather  modification  in  the  United 
States.69 

Another  one  of  the  many  studies  appearing  in  1966  was  a  report  by 
the  Commerce  Department's  Environmental  Science  Services  Admin- 
istration (ESSA),  the  organization  which  preceded  the  present  Na- 
tional Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (XOAA).70  Prepared 
in  response  to  a  request  by  the  ICAS,  the  report  was  prepared  by  an 
"in-house"  task  group  to  define  an  expanded  ESSA  program  in  light 
of  the  recommendations  of  the  XAS  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences Panel  on  Weather  and  Climate  Modification  and  those  of  the 
XSF  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification,  which  appeared 
in  reports  that  year.71' 72  It  outlined  a  5-year  program  of  research  for 
the  fiscal  years  1968  through  197:2,  with  projects  ranging  from  large- 
scale  field  experiments  to  those  in  more  basic  aspects  of  atmospheric 
science  pertinent  to  weather  modification. 

A  report  was  published  in  1968  by  the  U.S.  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture, as  part  of  the  continuing  joint  research  planning  by  the  Depart- 
ment and  State  agricultural  experiment  stations.73  The  recommended 
program  of  research  and  development  in  weather  modification  for 
agriculture  and  forestry  supplemented  the  national  program  of  re- 
search for  agriculture.  The  proposed  program  addressed  direct  modifi- 
cation of  the  weather  and  the  resulting  biological,  economic,  and  so- 
cial consequences  of  such  activity.  It  was  intended  to  contribute  to 
knowledge  and  technology  needed  "in  the  total  enterprise  of  agricul- 
ture and  forestry"  and  to  "provide  the  basis  for  essential  decisionmak- 
ing on  weather  modification  programs  affecting  nearly  every  aspect  of 
agriculture  and  forestry.74  The  report  discussed  national  goals,  defined 
a  national  research  and  development  program  for  agencies  of  the 
Department  of  Agriculture  and  the  State  agricultural  experiment 
stations,  and  reviewed  the  necessary  research  resources,  including  man- 
power, facilities,  and  organization.  For  each  major  phase  of  the  pro- 
posed research  activity,  the  report  recommended  levels  of  Federal  in- 
volvement and  financial  investment  for  fiscal  years  1972  and  1977.75 

Federal  Programs  ix  Weather  Modification 
introduction  and  fuxdixcr  summaries 

e  The  Federal  Government  has  been  involved  in  weather  modifica- 
tion research  and  development  for  more  than  30  years.  As  noted  ear- 
lier, these  research  programs  are  scattered  throughout  a  number  of 
Federal  departments  and  agencies.  They  are  not  carried  out  fully  in- 
dependent of  one  another,  however,  since  they  are  coordinated  by  man- 

69  Ibid.,  p.  iv. 

70  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Environmental  Science  Services  Administration.  "An 
Outline  of  a  Proposed  5-Year  Plan  in  Weather  Modification,"  Rockville,  Md.,  April  1966. 
66  pp. 

71  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  publication  Xo.  1350. 

72  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  XSF  66-3. 

73  Joint  Task  Force  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture  and  the  State  universities  and 
land  grant  colleges.  "A  National  Program  of  Research  for  Weather  Modification."  U.S.  De- 
partment of  Agriculture.  Research  Program  Development  and  Evaluation  Staff.  Washing- 
ton, D.C.,  January  196S,  3S  pp. 

7*  Ibid  ,  p.  1. 
73  Ibid.,  pp.  6-8. 


242 


agers  at  the  program  level,  especially  through  the  Interdepartmental 
Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (IOAS).  and  by  scientists  and 
engineers  at  the  working  level  through  a  number  of  mechanisms  in- 
cluding interagency  joint  projects  and  the  activities  of  professional 
organizations. 

The  Federal  weather  modification  program  has  been  considered  to 
be  composed  of  the  several  agency  programs  identified  as  weather 
modification  by  the  member  agencies  of  the  IOAS  and  reported  as 
such  to  the  ICAS.  According  to  the  latest  IOAS  annual  report.7'3 
weather  modification  programs  will  be  sponsored  during  fiscal  year 
1978  by  six  departments  and  agencies:  these  are  the  Departments  of 
Agriculture.  Commerce,  Defense,  and  Interior;  the  National  Science 
Foundation;  and  the  Energy  Eesearch  and  Development  Administra- 
tion (part  of  the  Department  of  Energy  as  of  October  1.  1977) .  As  late 
as  fiscal  year  1976  the  Department  of  Transportation  also  reported  a 
program  in  weather  modification,  and  the  National  Aeronautics  and 
Space  Administration  (XASA)  identified  a  research  program  in  warm 
fog  dispersal  through  fiscal  year  1973.  The  Environmental  Protection 
Agency  (EPA)  supports  research  on  inadvertent  weather  change  as 
a  joint  sponsor  of  the  METROMEX  project  in  St.  Louis  and  vicinity.77 
but  does  not  choose  to  report  this  research  as  weather  modification. 

In  the  early  years  of  the  ICAS  member  agencies  reported  their  fund- 
ing for  support  of  atmospheric  science  only  in  the  two  broad  cate- 
gories— meteorology  and  aeronomy.  Beginning  with  fiscal  year  1963, 
however,  there  has  been  a  discreet  identification  of  funds  for  weather 
modification;  the  total  Federal  effort  amounted  to  $2.7  million  that- 
fiscal  year.  Though  there  have  been  occasional  dips  since  then,  funding 
for  Federal  programs  has  increased  steadily  to  $20.3  million  for  fiscal 
year  1976;  however,  planned  fiscal  year  1978  funds  have  dropped  to 
$17.1  million.78 

Table  2  summarizes  funding  for  the  Federal  weather  modification 
research  program  by  agency  and  by  research  category,  as  reported  to 
the  ICAS,  for  fiscal  years  1976  through  1978,  data  for  the  latest  year 
being  estimated.  Figure  2  shows  the  course  of  funding  from  fiscal  years 
1966  through  1978,  from  ICAS  data  assembled  by  Fleagle,  who  has 
recently  reviewed  the  history  of  Federal  weather  modification  funding 
since  1946.79  From  1946  to  1958  the  Federal  Government  funded  several 
extensive  field  research  programs,  the  Department  of  Defense  provid- 
ing the  major  support  through  university  and  industrial  contracts. 
Since  expenditures  for  these  programs  were  not  reported  under 
weather  modification,  Federal  funding  for  this  period  cannot  be 
determined.80 

78  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "National  Atmospheric  Sci- 
ences Program  :  Fiscal  Year  197S."  ICAS  21-FY78,  1977,  p.  87. 

77  See  discussion  of  METROMEX  under  the  program  of  the  National  Science  Foundation, 
p.  38  3  ff. 

78  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology  :  Committee  on 
Atmosnhere  and  Oceans ;  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences ;  "Na- 
tional Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  Fiscal  Year  1978,"  ICAS  21-FY78,  August  1977, 
p.  87. 

70  Fleagle,  Robert  G..  "An  Analysis  of  Federal  Policies  in  Weather  Modification."  Back- 
ground paper  prepared  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advi- 
sory Hoard,  Seattle,  March  1977,  pp.  6-14. 

80  Ibid.,  p.  6. 


243 


TABLE  2.— SUMMARY  OF  FEDERAL  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  RESEARCH  FUNDING  FOR  FISCAL  YEAR  1976 
THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1978  (ESTIMATED),  BY  AGENCY  AND  BY  RESEARCH  CATEGORY,  AS  REPORTED  TO  THE 
INTERDEPARTMENTAL  COMMITTEE  FOR  ATMOSPHERIC  SCIENCES.  (FROM  ICAS  21— FISCAL  YEAR  1978). 

[In  thousands  of  dollars] 


Fiscal  year— 

1976  197T  1977  1978 


Department  of  Agriculture    

Department  of  Commerce.  

Department  of  Defense: 

Army...  .  

Navy..     

Air  Force  

Department  of  Interior   

Depa  rtment  of  Transportation  

Energy  Research  and  Development  Administration 
National  Science  Foundation  

Total....  

Precipitation  modification.   

Fop  and  cloud  modification  

Hail  suppression    

Lightning  modification.  

Hurricane  and  severe  storm  modification  

Social,  economic,  legal  and  ecological  studies  

Inadvertent  modification  of  weather  and  climate. . 
Support  and  services.  


70  21  55  20 

6,334  1,146  4,577  5,001 

100  119  268  190 

900  175  221  210 

409  112  550  575 

4,649  1,632  6,446  7,613 

555     

1,086  10  1,155  1,260 

6,216  1,110  5,702  2,250 


20,329  4,589  18,974  17,119 


3,382  1,057  4,881  5,900 

2,164  665  1,906  1,868 

3,080  488  2,950  1,180 

70  21  55  20 

1,961  461  1,911  1,810 

718  135  687  450 

4,834  889  3,693  4,158 

4,120  873  2,891  1,733 


g  *  .     \        I       I        I        I        I        I        |       I        I       I       |  | 
66  68  70  72  74  76  78 

FISCAL  YEAR 

Figure  2. — The  course  of  Federal  weather  modification  funding  (planning  budg- 
ets and  actual  expenditures)  from  fiscal  years  1966  to  1978,  as  reported  by 
the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences.  (Adapted  from 
Fleagle,  1977,  with  latest  data  from  ICAS  21-FY78.) 


244 


In  the  period  1958  to  1965  the  XSF,  as  part  of  its  lead  agency 
responsibilities,  reported  Federal  expenditures  in  weather  modifica- 
tion. Reported  expenditures  reached  about  $3  million  in  fiscal  year 

1965,  although  costs  of  aircraft,  radar,  and  manpower  provided  by  the 
Defense  Department  were  not  identified.  Beginning  with  fiscal  year 

1966,  expenditures  have  been  reported  annually  by  the  ICAS  under 
reasonably  constant  definitions  and  guidelines.81 

The  general  growth  in  Federal  funding  between  fiscal  years  1966 
and  1972  can  be  seen  in  figure  2.  Fleagle  speculates  that  the  funding- 
drop  following  1968  could  have  been  a  result  of  research  curtailments 
brought  on  by  the  Vietnam  war  or  of  the  failure  by  the  Congress  to 
designate  a  lead  agency  after  that  role  was  taken  from  the  XSF  by 
Public  Law  90-407.  He  feels  that  the  resurgence  in  1971  and  1972  could 
have  resulted  from  a  new  emphasis  on  weather  modification,  evidenced 
by  the  endorsement  by  the  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology 
of  seven  national  projects  identified  by  the  ICAS  82  and  the  appearance 
of  a  National  Academy  of  Sciences  study  which  emphasized  improved 
management  and  organization.83  In  January  1973  five  of  the  seven 
national  projects  were  suspended  or  terminated,  owing  to  the  exten- 
sive impoundments  of  appropriated  funds  by  the  President.  The  na- 
tional projects  represented  about  one-half  of  the  total  weather  modifi- 
cation budget,  exclusive  of  classified  Department  of  Defense  expendi- 
tures. The  partial  recovery  through  fiscal  year  1976  was  based  on 
increases  in  the  Department  of  the  Interior's  Project  Sky  water, 
XOAA's  preparation  for  resumed  hurricane  modification  research, 
and  ERDA's  growing  research  program  on  the  inadvertent  effects 
of  increased  energy  generation.84 

Fleagle  notes  that  "*  *  *  total  funding  for  weather  modification  has 
improved  over  the  period  from  1966  to  1977  largely  in  response  to 
what  are  perceived  as  the  needs  for  prompt  application  of  the  tech- 
nology," while  "reductions  have  occurred  as  results  of  factors  external 
to  weather  modification  and  external  to  the  agencies."  85 

Table  3  is  a  summary  by  agency  of  Federal  weather  modification 
research  support  since  fiscal  year  1963,  excluding  inadvertent  weather 
modification  research.  The  data  were  compiled  by  Corzine  of  XOAA 
from  a  variety  of  sources,  which  are  identified  in  the  table,  and  were 
accurate  as  of  March  1977.86 

Changnon  compared  the  Federal  weather  modification  funding  data 
with  those  of  the  entire  Federal  research  budget.87  From  fiscal  year 
1973  to  fiscal  year  1974,  for  example,  the  total  Federal  research  budget 
increased  6.5  percent,  and  federally  sponsored  civilian  research  (non- 
space  and  nonmilitary)  increased  11.8  percent,  while  weather  modifi- 
cation funding  dropped  21  percent.  Between  fiscal  years  1969  and 
1973.  a  period  of  rapid  growth  for  weather  modification  support,  civil- 
ian research  and  development  increased  120  percent  while  weather 
modification  research  increased  87  percent. 

61  Ibid.,  pp.  6-7. 

S2  See  n.  225  for  a  listing  of  those  national  projects. 

83  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Resenrch  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric 
Sciences.  "The  Atmospheric  Sciences  and  Man's  Needs  ;  Priorities  for  the  Future."  Wash- 
ington. D.C.,  May  1971.  88  pp. 

*l  Fleagle,  "An  Analysis  of  Federal  Policies  in  Weather  Modification."  1977.  pp.  7-9. 

65  Ibid.,  p.  9. 

86  Corzine.  Harold;  in  Fred  D.  White  (compiler).  "Highlights  of  Solicited  Opinions  on 
Weather  Modification"  (a  summary)  ;  prepared  for  use  by  t'  e  Department  of  Commerce 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.  National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration.  Rockville.  Md..  March  1977.  p.  30. 

87  Changnon,  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification,"  1977,  pp.  17-18. 


245 


TABLE  3.-FEDERAL  SUPPORT  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  RESEARCH,  FISCAL  YEARS  1963-78.  (FROM  CORZINE, 

1977.)  1  2 

[In  millions  of  dollars] 


Fiscal  year3 

Commerce 

Interior 

NSF 

DOD 

Agriculture 

Others  < 

Total 

1963  

0.19 

0.10 

1.32 

0.  96 

0.13 

0.05 

2.75 

1964  

.18 

.18 

1.57 

1.41 

.12 

.07 

3.53 

1965   

.11 

1.26 

2.01 

1.45 

.14 

0 

4.97 

1966..   

.65 

2.91 

2.00 

1.27 

.14 

.07 

7.04 

1967   

1.23 

3.73 

3.30 

1.33 

.25 

.08 

9.92 

1968  

1.53 

4.63 

3.39 

1.41 

.18 

.16 

11.30 

1969  

1.14 

4.27 

2.73 

1.63 

.29 

.18 

10.24 

1970....   

1.33 

4.  77 

3.15 

1.85 

.29 

.20 

11.59 

1971   

3.01 

6.52 

3.79 

1.44 

.36 

.72 

15.84 

1972   

3.94 

6.  66 

5.  50 

1.82 

.36 

.40 

18.68 

1973  

3.  77 

6.37 

6.20 

1.21 

.37 

.39 

18.31 

1974  

3.30 

3.90 

4.  70 

1.20 

.27 

.10 

13.47 

1975  

2.49 

4.00 

4.70 

1.14 

.09 

0 

12.42 

1976  (estimate) 
1977 

4.64 

4.  94 

5.60 

5  1.  12 

.07 

0 

16.  37 

4.58 

6.76 

4.40 

5  2.78 

.06 

0 

18.58 

1978 

3.84 

5.70 

2.00 

5  2.16 

.02 

13.72 

1  Excludes  inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification  research  funds. 

2  Excludes  DOD  spending  for  weather  modification  operations  in  Southeast  Asia  and  ?t  military  airports. 

3  Data  based  on:  1963-68,  NSF  Annual  Reports  on  Weather  Modification.  1969-71,  ICAS  Annual  Reports  14,  15,  and  16. 
1972-76  material  collected  for  Domestic  Council  Report  (figures  fcr  1975  and  1976  brought  up  to  date).  1977-78,  figures 
submitted  to  NOAA. 

4  Includes  Transportation,  EPA,  and  NASA. 

5  Includes  approximately  0.92,  2.18,  and  1.56  for  thermal  modification  of  warm  fog. 

Federal  research  and  development  funding  for  fiscal  years  1971 
through  1976,  according'  to  major  weather  modification  research  cate- 
gory, is  summarized  in  table  1.  which  also  indicates  the  agencies  under 
whose  programs  the  funds  were  expended.  Changnon  notes  that  these 
data  show  that: 88 

1.  The  greatest  effort  has  been  in  precipitation  modification,  but  with 
a. general  decrease  in  this  effort  with  time; 

•2.  There  has  been  a  rapid  growth  of  spending  on  inadvertent  modi- 
fication research; 

3.  Funding  for  fog  suppression  has  been  decreasing;  and 

4.  In  recent  years  the  research  categories  receiving  the  major  support 
are  precipitation  (snow  and  rain)  modification,  hail  suppression,  and 
inadvertent  modification. 


TABLE  4— FEDERAL  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  RESEARCH  SUPPORT  BY  RESEARCH  CATEGORY,  FOR  FISCAL  YEARS 
1971  THROUGH  1976.  (FROM  CHANGNON,  1977.) 

[In  millions  of  dollars) 


Fiscal  year- 
Supporting 

Type  1971        1972        1973        1974        1975        1976  agencies  i 


Precipitation  modification   8.0  6.2  6.0  3.7  4.4  5.0  DOC,  DOI,  NSF. 

Fog  and  cloud  mcdif.cation   2.9  2.9  2.9  2.4  1.1  1  3  DOD,  DOT,  NSF. 

Hail  suppression    2.6  2.9  3.2  3.3  3.5  3.8  NSF 

Lightning  modification   .9  .7           .7  .7           .2  .1  DOA,  DOD,  NSF. 

Severe  storm  modif.cation   .8  1.9  1.7  1.5  1  8  2  0  DOC 

Societal-economic  issues   .8  .9  1.1            8            6  11  NSF  DOI 

Inadvertent.   .6  1.7  1.7  2.9  5.2  4.9  NSF',  DOT,  DOC. 


i  DOC  =  Commerce;  DOD  =  Defense;  NSF=National  Science  Foundation;  DOI  =  Interior ;  DOT=Transportation;  DOA  = 
Agriculture. 


58  Ibid.,  p.  18. 


246 


There  have  been  minimal  Federal  efforts  in  operational  weather 
modification;  however,  since  these  activities  are  usually  conducted  as 
parts  of  other  operations  not  considered  weather  modification,  the 
expenditures  are  difficult  to  identify.  These  activities  have  included 
fog  dispersal  at  airports  by  the  Navy  and  the  Air  Force;  precipita- 
tion augmentation  operations  by  the  Defense  Department  overseas  at 
the  request  of  the  Governments  of  Panama,  Portugal,  Okinawa,  and 
the  Philippines;  and  1971  efforts  to  reduce  drought  in  Texas,  Okla- 
homa, Arizona,  and  Florida  by  the  Department  of  the  Interior,  the 
Air  Force,  and  NO  A  A.89  Shapley  reported  in  1974  that  estimated 
expenditures  by  the  Defense  Department  between  1966  and  1972  in 
attempts  to  increase  rain  during  the  Southeast  Asia  war  were  $21.6 
million.90 

Federal  weather  modification  programs  are  summarized,  by  agency, 
in  the  following  subsections.  Included  are  discussions  of  the  pro- 
grams of  the  departments  and  agencies  listed  in  table  2;  the  Depart- 
ment of  Transportation  has  been  included  since  its  program  was  ter- 
minated so  recently.  Discussions  contain  not  only  those  projects  which 
are  underway  or  planned  for  fiscal  year  1978,  but  also  activities  of 
the  recent  past,  in  order  to  show  the  continuity  and  the  development  or 
phasing  out  processes  for  each  of  the  several  programs. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 

Introduction 

A  major  weather  modification  research  program  has  been  conducted 
by  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  in  the  Department  of  the  Interior  since 
1961.  The  purpose  of  this  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management 
Program,  also  called  "Project  Sky  water,"  lias  been  to  develop  and  ver- 
ify a  practical  cloud-seeding  technology  for  increasing  water  supplies 
in  the  Western  States.  Initiated  through  a  congressional  write-in  of 
$100,000  in  the  fiscal  year  1962  Public  Works  appropriation,  the  mis- 
sion of  the  project  was  simply  stated  as  "research  on  increasing  rain- 
fall by  cloud  seeding."  91  Congressional  direction  has  been  almost  en- 
tirely through  provisions  in  Public  Works  appropriation  documents. 
A  summary  of  the  appropriation  language  contained  in  these  docu- 
ments between  1961  and  1977  is  found  in  appendix  J. 

Since  its  inception,  the  program  has  been  characterized  by  the  fol- 
lowing three  guidelines  that  were  established.92 

1.  It  was  to  be  an  applied  research  program,  using  "engineering 
approaches"  rather  than  a  basic  or  pure  research  program. 

2.  Scient  ific  expertise  was  to  be  used  where  it  existed  rather  than 
from  an  "in-house"  effort. 

3.  Additional  water  and  benefits  accruing  to  local  groups  from  re- 
search seeding  would  not  be  reimbursed. 

f0  Ibid. 

00  Shaplev.  Deborah.  "Weather  Warfare:  Pentagon  Concedes  7-year  Vietnam  Effort,"  Sci- 
ence, vol.  184.  No.  4141.  June  7.  1974,  p.  1059. 

01  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  "Atmospheric  Water  Resources 
Management  Program  ;  Project  Skywater.  Information  Summary,"  presented  before  the  U.S. 
Department  of  Commerce  National  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  May  31,  1977, 
Washington,  D.C.,  p.  1. 

92  Ibid. 


247 


The  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  through  Project  Skywater,  has  been 
the  principal  Federal  agency  concerned  with  the  operational  adapta- 
tion of  precipitation  enhancement  research. 

Recent  legislation  in  the  95th  Congress  has  also  enabled  the  Bureau 
to  provide  grants  to  States  in  order  to  facilitate  emergency  weather 
modification  activities  in  hope  of  mitigating  effects  of  the  1976-77 
drought.  This  program,  not  part  of  the  Atmospheric  Water  Resources 
Management  Program,  is  discussed  in  a  subsequent  section.93 

Table  5  is  a  summary  of  weather  modification  research  funding  and 
projected  funding  from  fiscal  year  1976  through  fiscal  year  1978  for 
the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  All  of  the  funds  shown  are  associated 
with  Project  Skywater  and  do  not  include  those  previously  mentioned 
in  connection  with  emergency  grants  for  drought  alleviation. 

TABLE  5. — WEATHER  MODIFICATION  FUNDING  FOR  FISCAL  YEAR  1976  THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1978  FOR  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR,  BUREAU  OF  RECLAMATION,  UNDER  THE  ATMOSPHERIC  WATER  RESOURCES 
MANAGEMENT  PROGRAM  (PROJECT  SKYWATER)1 

[In  thousands  of  dollars] 


Fiscal  year 

Transition 

Fiscal  year 

Fiscal  year 

1976 

quarter 

1977 

1978 

Precipitation  management: 

Snow  augmentation  (including  SCPP)  

375 

50 

400 

1,750 

Rain  enhancement  (HIPLEX)  

2,  475 

1,  007 

3,  800 

4,  000 

Modeling  and  comprehensive  analysis  studies  

500 

100 

470 

300 

Social,  economic,  legal  and  environmental  

300 

75 

400 

300 

Support  and  services  

2  999 

MOO 

2 1,  376 

2 1,  263 

Total  

4,  649 

1,632 

6,  446 

7,613 

1  From  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for 
Atmospheric  Sciences.  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  program:  Fiscal  Year  1978.  ICAS  21— Fiscal  year  1978.  August 
1977,  p.  91. 

2  Includes  computer  and  planning  costs. 

Project  Skywater  general  discussion 

Over  the  past  decade,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation's  Atmospheric 
Water  Resources  Management  Program  (Project  Skywater)  has  ac- 
counted for  about  one-third  of  the  total  Federal  program  in  all  forms 
of  weather  modification.  All  of  the  Bureau's  funding  has  been  directed, 
however,  toward  research  in  precipitation  enhancement.  Of  the  funds 
appropriated,  about  83  percent  are  used  for  contracted  research.  Table 
6  shows  the  breakdown  of  funding  for  the  fiscal  years  1962  through 
1977  by  kinds  of  contractor  and  according  to  in-house  or  other  Fed- 
eral expenditure.  From  the  table  it  can  be  seen  that  41  percent  has 
been  allocated  to  universities,  23  percent  to  private  firms,  10  percent 
to  State  governments,  and  6  percent  to  other  Federal  agencies,  while 
17  percent  has  been  spent  by  the  Bureau  for  planning,  management, 
and  in-house  research.  Table  7  shows  the  breakdown  of  these  funds 
in  accordance  with  functions  or  major  projects.  The  three  major 
projects  in  the  table  will  be  discussed  briefly  below. 


93  See  p.  266  of  this  section,  and  also  see  p.  202  under  discussion  of  congressional 
activities. 


248 


TABLE  6 -ATMOSPHERIC  WATER  RESOURCES  MANAGEMENT  PROGRAM;  OBLIGATION  SUMMARY  FISCAL 
YEAR  1962  THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1977 1 


Total  incurred 

Fiscal  year 

Universities 

Private 

State 

USBR2 

Other  Federal 

obligations 

1962  

$70, 000 

0 

0 

$30,000 

0 

$100,000 

1963    

83, 747 

0 

0 

16,253 

0 

100, 000 

1964  

133,  000 

0 

0 

42,  000 

0 

175,000 

1965   

459, 630 

$283, 978 

$3,  500 

151,892 

$201,000 

1,100, 000 

1966  

1,531,400 

637,  250 

168,  700 

303, 150 

?  qpd  nnn 

£,  JCU,  UUU 

1967 

1  989  321 

779  125 

361,300 

368  396 

251,858 

3,750, 000 

1968  

2,717,  689 

859'  000 

345,  000 

423',  311 

286,  200 

4,  631,  200 

1  QfiQ 

o  77R  ok 

obit,  Idb 

31  0  MO 

oio,  Dty 

4bU, bob 

273, 500 

4, 689, 656 

1970  

2,  966,  200 

873,  866 

254,885 

446,232 

268, 325 

4,  809,  508 

1971  

3,519,083 

1,415,187 

570,600 

753,  436 

335,  344 

6,  593,  650 

1972   

3,  539,  323 

1,348,203 

664, 926 

784,  857 

321,597 

6,658,906 

1973   

3,312,939 

1, 105,  029 

905,  200 

889,  387 

173,  021 

6,  385,  576 

1974..  

899, 110 

1,498,  982 

336, 104 

976,  747 

189,  282 

3,900,  225 

1975   

768,  911 

1,318,961 

2S6.227 

1,270,634 

342,491 

3,  997,  224 

1976   

497,  572 

1,480,462 

617, 133 

1,677,  593 

391,196 

4,663,956 

Transition  quarter 

214, 245 

609,  229 

234,  528 

469,914 

96, 175 

1,  624,  091 

1977  (estimate)  

1,800,000 

1,600,000 

1,200, 000 

1,454,481 

400,  000 

6,  454,  481 

Total  

27,  278,  985 

14,  669,  398 

6,  276,  652 

10,  518,  949 

3,  869,  489 

3  62,348,  381 

Percent   44  23  10  17  6  100 


1  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management  Program:  Project  Skywater.  Infcrmaticn  summary. 
May  31,  1977,  p.  24. 

2  Includes  salaries,  equipment,  supplies,  and  computer  costs. 

3  Official  total  as  corrected  for  recoveries,  underf.nancing,  and  other  adjustments. 


Table  7. —  Bureau  of  Reclamation  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management 
Program.  Allocation  of  Funding  by  Function  and  by  Major  Projects  for  Fiscal 
Years  1962  Through  1977  1 


Research  and  development   $31,  749,  665 

Environmental   2,  173,  676 

Associated  comprehensive  studies   3,  296,  202 

Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project   5,  100,  792 

Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project   866,  805 

HIPLEX   10,  557,  767 

Other  pilot  projects   1,  980,  000 

Planning,  management,  and  program  support   6,  623,  471 


62,  348,  381 


1  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Atmospheric  water  resources 
management  program  :  Project  Skywater.  Information  summary,  May  31,  1977,  p.  23. 


249 


Artist's  rendering  of  portable  radar  used  in  Project  Sky  water.  (Courtesy  of  the 

Bureau  of  Reclamation.) 


250 


Sky  water  has  emphasized  cooperation,  joint  participation,  and  cost 
sharing  with  State  resource  and  environmental  agencies;  and  field 
experiments  have  included  research  contracted  with  universities,  State 
agencies,  and  private  firms.  Funds  have  also  been  transferred  to  other 
Federal  agencies,  who  have  cooperated  in  the  various  aspects  of  the 
program.  Table  8  is  a  listing  of  the  principal  contractors  and  Govern- 
ment activities  who  have  participated.  Research  contracts  have  been 
concerned  with  winter  orographic  snowfall  augmentation  and  in- 
creases in  summer  convective  cloud  rainfall — both  of  which  are  prin- 
cipal precipitation  mechanisms  in  the  Western  United  States.  The 
distribution  of  major  field  projects  underway  or  planned  during  fiscal 
year  1977  as  part  of  Skywater  and  the  locations  of  contractor  institu- 
tions and  Federal  activities  involved  in  various  aspects  of  the  program 
are  shown  in  figure  3. 

TABLE  8. — PRINCIPAL  CONTRACTORS  AND  RESEARCH  C00PERAT0RS  ASSOCIATED  WITH  PROJECT  SKYWATER  i 


University  Private  Government 


University  of  Arizona. 

Brigham  Young  University. 

University  of  California. 

University  of  California  at  Los  Angeles. 

University  of  Colorado. 

Colorado  State  University. 

University  of  Denver. 

Fresno  State  College. 

Harvard  University. 

University  of  Michigan. 

Montana  State  University. 

University  of  Nevada. 

New  Mexico  State  University. 

New  York  University. 

University  of  North  Dakota. 

North  Dakota  State  University. 

University  of  Oklahoma. 

Pennsylvania  State  University. 

San  Diego  State  University. 

South  Dakota  School  of  Mines  and 

Technology. 
South  Dakota  State  University. 
Taft  College. 

Texas  A.  &  M.  Research  Foundation. 
Utah  State  University. 
University  of  Washington. 
University  of  Wisconsin. 
University  of  Wyoming. 


Amos  Eddy,  Inc. 

Aeromet,  Inc. 

Aerometric  Research,  Inc. 

Convergence  Systems,  Inc. 

Colorado  International  Corp. 

E.  Bollay  Associates. 

E.G.  &  G.,  Inc. 

Electronic  Techniques,  Inc. 

Enterprise  Electronics,  Inc. 

Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology, Inc. 

Geophysical  Research  and  Develop- 
ment Corp. 

Human  Ecology  Research  Services. 

M.  B.  Associates,  Inc. 

Meteorology  Research,  Inc. 

North  American  Weather  Con- 
sultants. 

Stanford  Research,  Inc. 

T.  G.  Owe  Berg,  Inc. 

Travelers  Research  Inc. 

Weather  Science,  Inc. 

Western  Scientific  Services,  Inc. 


U.S.  Air  Force. 

U.S.  Army  (Pueblo  Depot). 

California  Department  of  Transportation. 

California  Highway  Partol. 

Colorado  Department  of  Natural  Resources. 

Colorado  River  Municipal  Water  District. 

Forest  Service. 

General  Services  Administration. 

Geological  Survey. 

Illinois  State  Water  Survey. 

Kansas  Water  Resources  Board. 

Montana  Department  of  Natural  Resources 
and  Conservation. 

National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric 
Administration. 

National  Science  Foundation. 

Navy  Weapons  Center. 

Navy  Weather  Research  Facility. 

Nebraska  Department  of  Agriculture. 

North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board. 

Sacramento  River  Forecast  Center. 

Soil  Conservation  Service. 

South  Dakota  Weather  Control  Com- 
mission. 

Southwestern  Water  Conservation  District. 
Washington  Department  of  Ecology. 
Texas  Water  Development  Board. 
Utah  Department  of  Water  Resources. 


i  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management  Program:  Project  Skywater.  Information  summary, 
May  31.  1977.  p.  26. 

The  widespread  field  projects  of  Skywater  from  1962  through  1977 
are  shown  in  figure  4.  In  recent  years,  research  experiments  and  studies 
have  been  concentrated  on  three  major  projects,  one  of  which  has 
just  been  completed,  while  the  other  two  are  in  realtively  early  stages. 
These  projects,  each  of  which  is  discussed  below  in  some  detail,  are  the 
Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project,  the  High  Plains  Cooperative  Pro- 
gram (HIPLEX),  and  the  Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project.  In  addi- 
I  ion  lo  t  he  concentrated  research  effort  in  these  three  regional  projects, 
the  Bureau  continues  to  provide  technical  planning  and  equipment 
assistance  to  local  projects  in  States  such  as  North  Dakota,  Kansas, 
Texas,  and  Pi  ah.  Support  is  also  being  given  to  the  development  of 
the  application  of  satellite  imagery  for  cloud  seeding  decisions  and 
evaluations  and  to  the  adaptation  of  research  cloud  models  for  use  in 
local  operations.  The  Skywater  Environmental  Computer  Network 


251 


provides  real-time  data  support  to  both  field  research  and  commercial 
weather  modification  projects  on  a  cooperative  basis.  Figure  5  is  a 
schematic  of  the  Data  Network,  with  its  central  unit  in  Denver,  which 
also  provides  access  to  real  time  and  archived  data  for  a  variety  of 
other  research  projects.  Cloud  models  and  other  computerized  aids  are 
made  available  for  testing  by  winter  and  summer  operators  through 
the  Environmental  Data  Network  in  return  for  practical  appraisals  of 
usefulness  and  recommendations  for  improvement. 

Planning  and  other  preliminary  field  studies  for  possible  future 
weather  modification  cooperative  research  in  the  Colorado  River 
Basin  are  continuing.  Recently,  the  final  programmatic  environmental 
impact  statement  for  Project  Skywater  was  completed.94  Several  site 
specific  environmental  impact  statements,  including  one  for  the  Colo- 
rado River  Basin  Pilot  Project,  were  completed  earlier.  A  compre- 
hensive assessment  of  the  entire  field  of  precipitation  enhancement  is 
being  performed,  which  includes  reviews  of  both  research  and  opera- 
tional project  results. 

Project  Skywater  =  FY  1977 


Figure  3.— Major  Skywater  field  projects  and  locations  of  contractors  and  Federal 
institutions  during  fiscal  year  1977.  (From  Project  Skywater  information 
summary,  May  31,  1977.) 

e*  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  "Final  Environmental  State- 
ment for  Project  Skywater  ;  a  Program  of  Research  in  Precipitation  Management,  '  Division 
of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management,  INT  FES  77-39,  Denver,  Oct.  2o,  1977.  In 
three  volumes.  (376  and  316  and  266  pp.) 


252 

Skywater  Field  Projects  1962-1977 


A     COOPERATIVE   PROGRAMS  (9) 


Figure  4. — Locations  of  Skywater  field  projects  from  1962  through  1977.  ( From 
Project  Skywater  information  summary,  May  31,  1977.) 


PROJECT     SKYWATER    ENVIRONMENTAL    COMPUTER  NETWORK 


Operational 
Research  Seeding 
Projects  Projects 


Model 
Developers 


Other 
Users 


Direct   Dial    Lines    To  Users 


NWS  Observations 


\    /  / 


Denver 
Bureou  of  Reclamation 


-Data  Bank 
-Programs 
-Models 
-Analysis 
-Plotting 


2400  Baud  High  Sped 


■Processed  Data 
-Grid  Forecasts. 


Suitland 


NMC 


Q  ERTS 

X 


Goddard 


NASA 


Figure  5. — Schematic  of  the  Project  Skywater  Environmental  Computer  Network. 
(From  Project  Skywater  information  summary,  May  31,  1977.) 


253 


34-857  O  -  79  -  19 


254 


The  Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project  {CRBPP) 

This  Avas  a  large  weather  modification  research  project  conducted 
by  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  under  Project  Sky  water  to  determine 
the  feasibility  of  augmenting  high  mountain  snowpacks  in  the  San 
Juan  Mountains  of  southwestern  Colorado.  The  seeding  and  data  col- 
lection phase  of  this  large  project  was  conducted  between  1970  and 
1975,  although  planning  for  the  experiment  began  in  1967.  Project 
evaluations  were  prepared  in  1976,  and  further  analyses  and  environ- 
mental studies  are  continuing  in  1977.  The  target  area  selected  for  the 
CRBPP  (or  the  San  Juan  Project  as  it  is  sometimes  called)  covered 
nearly  3,400  km2  (1,300  mi2)  of  sparsely  populated  mountainous  ter- 
rain east  and  northeast  of  Durango,  Colo.  Elevations  extended  from 
above  2,750  meters  to  4,200  meters.95  Figure  6  shows  the  locations  of 
target  areas  and  instrumentation  arrays  in  the  CRBPP  in  southwest 
Colorado. 

The  Colorado  River  Basin  is  one  of  the  most  water-short  areas  in 
the  Nation,  and  weather  modification  has  been  recommended  as  a 
practical  and  immediately  available  water  augmentation  technology.96 
Preliminary  results  show  that  a  19-percent  augmentation  in  streamfiow 
may  be  possible  through  seeding  in  this  area  of  headwaters  of  the 
Colorado  River  Basin.97 

05  Aerometric  Research,  Inc.,  "Colorado  River  Basin  IMlot  Project;  Executive  Summary 
of  Comprehensive  Evaluation,"  prepared  for  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion under  contract  No.  14-06-D-7332.  Goleta,  Calif.,  December  1976,  p.  1. 

08  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  "National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  Fiscal  Year  1977."  ICAS  20- 
FY  77,  May  1976,  p.  92. 

07  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  "Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management  Program  ;  Project 
Skywater,"  May  31,  1977,  p.  25. 


Figure  6. — Map  showing  the  locations  of  target  areas  and  instrumentation 
arrays  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project  in  southwest  Colorado.  (From 
Bureau  of  Reclamation.) 


256 


Kesults  of  analyses  of  the  San  Juan  project  indicate  that  winter  oro- 
graphic, storms  are  somewhat  more  complex  than  thought  originally, 
but  that  additional  snowpack  can  be  provided  through  seeding. 
Characteristics  of  treatable  storms  have  been  identified  more  cleary.98 
In  a  major  analysis  and  evaluation  of  the  project  it  was  determined 
that  many  of  the  clouds  actually  seeded  in  the  experiment  were  not  of 
a  suitable  type,  that  on  some  experimental  days  the  weather  did  not 
develop  as  forecast,  that  in  some  cases  seeding  material  remained  in 
the  area  beyond  planned  experimental  seeding  periods,  and  on  some 
days  rapid  weather  changes  produced  conditions  in  which  precipita- 
tion was  decreased  by  seeding."  Consequently,  "the  total  unstratified 
statistical  analysis  found  no  difference  between  precipitation  on  seeded 
experimental  days  and  control  days.  However,  when  days  of  missed 
forecasts  were  removed,  and  data  from  experimental  days  were  reduced 
to  6 -hour  time  blocks  to  improve  the  correlation  between  meteorological 
covariates  and  precipitation,  increases  during  certain  classes  of  seeded 
cases  were  statistically  significant."  1  Nevertheless,  the  evaluation  re- 
port concludes  that,  "the  overall  potential  for  seeding-produced  in- 
creases in  precipitation  during  a  winter  of  average  snowfall  was  de- 
termined to  be  about  10  percent.  The  resulting  potential  increase  in 
streamflow  of  about  19  percent  is  197  million  m3  for  the  San  Juan 
Kiver."  2 

98  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  "Reclamation  in  the  Seven- 
ties," second  progress  report.  A  water  resources  technical  publication,  research  rept.  No. 
28.  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1!*77.  p.  2. 

09  Atmospheric  Research,  Inc.,  "Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project ;  Executive  Summary 
of  Comprehensive  Evaluation,"  1976,  p.  3. 

1  Ibid. 

2  Ibid. 


Remotely  operated  cloud  seeding  generator  similar  to  those  used  in  the  Colorado 
River  Basin  Pilot  Project.  (Courtesy  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.) 


258 


The  High  Plains  Cooperative  Program  {HIPLEX) 

HIPLEX  is  a  comprehensive  weather  modification  research  pro- 
gram designed  "to  develop  a  practical,  scientifically  sound,  and  social- 
ly acceptable  technology  for  precipitation  management  applicable  to 
summer  connective  cloud  systems  in  the  High  Plains  region  of  the 
United  States."  3  The  overall  goal  of  HIPLEX  is  "to  establish  a  veri- 
fied, effective  cloud  seeding  technology  and  a  policy  and  management 
background  for  responsibly  producing  additional  rain  in  the  semiarid 
Plain  States.  This  goal  includes  improving  the  current  operational 
cloud  seeding  methods,  transferring  the  techniques  and  results  to  con- 
cerned groups ;  and  enhancing  public  confidence  in  their  use."  4 

Kesearch  in  HIPLEX  is  being  conducted  at  three  field  sites :  Miles 
City,  Mont. ;  Goocllancl,  Kans. ;  and  Big  Spring,  Tex.  (see  fig.  3) .  These 
cities  represent,  respectively,  the  northern,  central,  and  sourthern 
High  Plains ;  they  were  chosen  in  view  of  the  known  or  suspected  varia- 
tion of  climatic  conditions  and  cloud  characteristics  over  the  north- 
south  extent  of  the  High  Plains  and  the  obvious  implications  of  such 
variations  on  technology  transferability.5  Examination  and  under- 
standing of  the  social,  political,  and  agronomic  differences  across  the 
High  Plains  and  their  implications  for  effective  technology  transfer 
was  also  instrumental  in  selecting  a  variety  of  field  sites.6 

HIPLEX  was  initiated  in  1973  when  the  Office  of  Management  and 
Budget  (OMB)  assigned  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  the  responsi- 
bility for  mounting  an  experimental  program  to  test  scientific  con- 
cepts for  augmenting  precipitation  in  the  High  Plains.  The  $1  million 
first  appropriated  for  HIPLEX  in  fiscal  year  1974  has  grown  to  about 
$4  million  in  fiscal  year  1977,  each  recent  year's  appropriation  also  in- 
cluding a  congressional  write-in  which  has  increased  OMB's  pro- 
gramed budget.7  About  80  percent  of  the  fiscal  year  1977  budget  has 
been  for  contracted  research  and  20  percent  for  in-house  management 
and  support.  Universities  received  29  percent  of  the  contracted  research 
funds,  private  firms  were  awarded  81  percent,  and  20  percent  went  to 
State  and  Federal  agencies.8  Table  9  is  a  funding  breakdown  of  fiscal 
year  1977  HIPLEX  funds  by  function,  expressed  in  percentage  of  the 
total  HIPLEX  budget. 

Table  9. — Fiscal  year  1977  HIPLEX  funding  breakdown  by  function 


Function :  Percent 

Field   operations   44. 1 

Analysis    28. 7 

Management,  planning,  design,  data  management   22.5 

►Social,  legal,  and  environmental  studies  (augmentation  to  State  sup- 
ported  activities)  •   4.7 

Total   100.0 


a  Silverman.  Bernard  A  .  "HIPLEX  :  An  Overview."  Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  In- 
advertent Wenther  Modification.  American  Meteorological  Society.  Champaign-Urbana,  111., 
Oct  10-18,  1077.  p.  311. 

*  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  "High  Plains  Cooperative  Pro- 
gram ;  Progress  and  Planning  Report  No.  2,"  Denver.  March  1976,  p.  3. 

G  Silverman,  "HIPLEX  :  An  Overview,"  1977,  p.  311. 

6  Ibid. 

7  Ibid. 

8  Ibid.,  pp.  311-312. 


259 


University  of  North  Dakota  radar  used  under  contract  in  the  High  Plains  Coop- 
erative Program  (HIPLEX)  of  Project  Sky  water.  (Courtesy  of  the  Bureau  of 
Reclamation.) 


260 


HIPLEX  is  envisioned  as  a  5-  to  7-year  program,  running  through 
about  1982.  Earliest  attention  has  been  given  to  the  site  at  Miles  City, 
Mont.,  where  seeding  was  first  conducted  during  1976,  though  pre- 
liminary studies  and  measurements  of  cloud  properties  have  also  been 
underway  at  the  other  two  sites.  The  following  accomplishments  should 
be  noted : 9 

1.  Field  facilities  and  research  teams  have  been  established  at  the 
three  field  sites :  Miles  City,  Mont. ;  Goodland,  Kans. ;  and  Big  Spring, 
Tex. 

2.  Active  participation  and  cost-sharing  with  the  States  is  underway. 

3.  Major  equipment  systems  have  been  installed  and  tested. 

4.  Agricultural,  economic,  and  environmental  assessment  studies  are 
underway  in  all  three  areas. 

5.  Experimental  designs  and  data  processing  and  analysis  proce- 
dures have  been  developed. 

The  experimental  design  for  HIPLEX  consists  of  two  components — 
an  'atmospheric  effort  and  a  socioeconomic  and  environmental  effort. 
Experimental  components  are  divided  into  three  overlapping  phases, 
which  are  consistent  with  sequential  scientific  efforts.  In  a  fourth 
phase  the  developed  technology  is  to  be  transferred  to  applicable  areas 
in  the  High  Plains  region.10  The  details  of  this  four-phase  design  and 
tentative  dates  associated  with  the  overall  schedule  are  shown  in 
figure  7. 

9  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  "High  Plains  Cooperative  Program  ;  Progress  and  Plan- 
ning Report  No.  2,"  p.  5. 

'  10  Ackerman,  Bernice,  G.  L.  Achtemeier,  H.  Appleman,  Stanley  A.  Changnon,  Jr.,  F.  A. 
Huff,  G.  M.  Morgan,  Paul  T.  Schickedanz,  and  Richard  G.  Semonin,  "Design  of  the  High 
Plains  Experiment  with  Specific  Focus  on  Phase  2,  Single  Cloud  Experiment,"  Illinois  State 
Water  Survey,  final  report  on  Hiplex  design  project  to  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  contract 
14-06-D-7197.  Urbana,  111.,  June  30,  1976,  p.  7. 


261 


Year 
1973 
74 
75 


77 


COMPONENTS  OF  HIPLEX  -  RAINFALL  ENHANCEMENT 
Phase  Atmospheric 


Phase  1 
Exploratory 
Studies 


73 
79 


82-85 
83,86 


86-91 


Phase  2 

Single-Cloud 

Rain 

Modification 
Experiment 


Phase  3 
Area  Rain 
Modification 
Experiment 


Phase  4 


Establish 

•  rain  characteristics 
•cloud  characteristics 

•  seeding  technologies 
•measurement  techniques 
•reasonable  hypotheses 


Phase  2 
Modification  Hypotheses 
Formulated 


Pre-POCE: 

•test  of  hypotheses 

•field  test  of  seeding 

techniques 
•  develop  physical/ 

statistical  design 


Sharpen  hypotheses  and 
select  for  experiment 


Socio-Economic 
&  Environmental 


Delineate 

•political  attitudes 
•  economic  models 
•iegal  requirements 
•downwind  impact 
•ecological  impacts 
•undesirable  atmospheric 
impacts 


Monitor  Impacts 

and 


* 

I 

Proof  of  Concept  Experiment: 

Semi-isolated  Clouds 
•monitor  physical  changes 

in  clouds 
•monitor  precipitation 
•  continuous  evaluation  - 

physical/statistical 
•conclude  when  design 

criteria  are  met 

Evaluate 

Phase  3 
Hypothesis  Developed 

  t 

Monitor  Impacts 

Develop  physical/statistical 

design 
Launch  experiments 
Perform  continuous  evaluation 
Re-define  initial  hypothesis 
Conclude  when  design  criteria 

achieved 

1 

and 

Evaluate  Benefits  and 
Disbenefits 

Transfer  of  Technology 
to  High  Plains  states 
and  Other  Users 


Figure  7. — Flow  of  experimental  effort  in  HIPLEX,  showing  tentative  schedule 
through  1991.  (From  Bernard  A.  Silverman,  1977,  private  communication.) 


262 


University  of  Wyoming  instrumented  cloud  physics  aircraft.  (Courtesy  of  the 

Bureau  of  Reclamation.) 


HIPLEX  is  primarily  a  Skywater  activity ;  however,  it  also  includes 
the  integrated  research  and  supporting  efforts  of  State  agencies,  local 
groups,  and  other  Federal  agencies.  Field  research  and  analyses  are  to 
be  conducted  primarily  through  contracts  with  private  firms  and  uni- 
versities, and  the  project  is  closely  coordinated  with  related  research 
sponsored  by  the  National  Science  Foundation  and  the  Department  of 
Commerce.  In  order  to  develop  optimum  water  augmentation  poten- 
tial, pertinent  State  and  local  organizations  in  the  High  Plains  have 
joined  with  the  Bureau  in  planning,  funding,  and  implementing  this 
broad  research  program  which  is  designed  to  accomplish  the 
following : 11 

1.  Develop  and  test  more  productive  seeding  methods  and  evaluate 
results. 

2.  Resolve  the  remaining  cloud  dynamics  and  precipitation  physics 
uncertainties  on  seeding  effects. 

3.  Help  prepare  public  weather  modification  backgrounds  and  local 
expertise  and  establish  working  relations  among  concerned  non-Fed- 
eral entities. 

4.  Assess  the  actual  economic  value  of  cloud  seeding  and  the  possible 
social  and  ecological  impacts. 

Anticipated  overall  costs  for  State  cooperation  and  cost-sharing  in 
HIPLEX  is  estimated  to  be  about  $3  million.  This  contribution 
amounts  to  10  to  15  percent  of  the  total  HIPLEX  research  budget, 


11  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  "High  Plains  Cooperative  Program  ;  Progress  and 
Planning  Report  No.  2,"  pp.  3-5. 


263 


since  the  total  Federal  portion  of  the  project  is  projected  at  about  $20 
million.12 

HIPLEX  cooperative  agreements  for  cost-sharing  and  field  research 
support  have  been  negotiated  with  the  States.13  as  shown  in  table  10. 
Funding  provided  by  some  of  these  States  and  by  the  Bureau  of  Re- 
clamation from  fiscal  year  1974:  through  fiscal  year  1978  (estimated)  is 
shown  in  table  11. 

TABLE  10.— HIPLEX  COST-SHARING  AND  FIELD  RESEARCH  AGREEMENTS  WITH  STATES  (FROM  U.S.  DEPARTMENT 
OF  INTERIOR,  HIGH  PLAINS  COOPERATIVE  PROGRAM,  PROGRESS  AND  PLANNING  REPORT  NO.  2.) 


Field  site  States  Date  signed 

Miles  City,  Mont     Montana...   Aug.  25,  1974. 

Goodland,  Kans..   Kansas,  Colorado,  Nebraska   May  29,  1974  (tristate). 

Big  Spring,  Tex  Texas    Oct.  30,  1974. 


TABLE  11.— SUMMARY  OF  HIPLEX  FUNDS  PROVIDED  BY  STATES  AND  BY  THE  BUREAU  OF  RECLAMATION,  FISCAL 
YEAR  1974  THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1978  (ESTIMATED) » 


State  funds  Bureau  of 

  Reclamation 

Fiscal  years  Kansas        Montana  Texas  Totals  funds 


19f4   $6,000  0  0  $6,000  $1,250,000 

1975   100,000  0  $25,000  125,000  1,821,000 

1976  plus  transition  quarter   100, 000  0  81, 500  181, 500  3, 482, 000 

1977   100,000  $25,000  65,000  190,000  4,110.000 

1978  (estimate)   100,000  25,000  75,000  200,000  4,000,000 


Total   406,000  50,000  246,500  702,500  14,663,000 


i  Private  communication  from  James  L.  Kerr,  Washington  representative,  Office  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources,  Bureau 
of  Reclamation.  November  1977. 

The  Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project  (SCPP) 

This  cooperative  precipitation  augmentation  research  project  is 
being  initiated  under  the  auspices  of  Project  Skywater  and  several 
State  agencies  in  the  northern  Sierra  Nevada  Mountain  Range  of 
California  and  Nevada.  Cooperation  with  commercial  cloud  seeding 
operators,  whose  efforts  in  this  region  have  been  funded  for  several 
decades  by  west  coast  utility  companies,  is  expected  to  be  a  unique  part 
of  the  project. 

The  Sierra  project  began  in  1972  with  preliminary  planning  and 
discussions.  Research  projects  along  the  crest  of  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains and  in  the  Sierra  Nevada  have  shown  the  possibility  of  increased 
snowfall  and  consequent  streamflow  enhancement  through  seeding  cer- 
tain types  of  weather  systems.  Commercial  projects  in  the  Sierra  have 
reported  consistent  5  to  8  percent  streamflow  increases.  The  Sierra 
project  is  intended  to  investigate  the  physical  basis  for  the  reported  in- 
creases and  the  feasibility  of  developing  a  more  precise  technology 
for  snowfall  enhancement  for  this  region.14 

The  Bureau  of  Reclamation  and  the  State  of  California  agreed  to 
pursue  a  research  program  in  the  Sierra  Nevada  in  1973  and  jointly 

™  Ibid.,  p.  10. 

13  Ibid.,  p.  9. 

14  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  "A  Status  Report :  The  Sierra 
Cooperative  Pilot  Project  "(with  excerpts  from  'Weather  Modification  Design  for  Stream- 
now  Augmentation  in  the  Northern  Sierra  Nevada."  an  initial  study  by  MAB  Associates, 
San  Ramon,  Calif.),  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Washington,  February  1977,  p.  1. 


264 


funded  a  contract  for  an  assessment  of  potential  environmental  effects 
that  needed  study.  Public  meetings  were  held  in  California  and  Nevada 
during  1974  to  solicit  comments  on  the  proposed  project.  Another  con- 
tract, funded  in  May  1975,  led  to  publication  of  a  project  design  report 
in  December  1976.  In  August  1975  the  California  Department  of  Water 
Resources  withdrew  as  a  financial  partner  in  the  project,  owing  to  re- 
orientation of  priorities  and  redirection  of  manpower  and  funds 
toward  other  water  projects.  The  department  continues  to  provide 
available  information  needed  for  development  of  the  project  and  mon- 
itors its  progress. 

Two  studies  on  likely  social  and  environmental  effects  of  incremental 
snowpack  increases  on  highways  and  public  transportation  were  com- 
pleted in  1976  by  two  other  agencies  of  the  State  of  California,  the 
California  Highway  Patrol  and  the  California  Department  of  Trans- 
portation. A  survey  of  individual  citizens  and  organizational  repre- 
sentatives on  attitudes  and  concerns  about  seeding  by  winter  cloud 
seeding  was  also  conducted  in  1976. 15 

The  preliminary  experimental  design  notes  that  storms  in  the  Sierra 
cooperative  project  can  be  classified  into  two  types  and  recommends 
that  the  project  should  attempt  to  modify  the  storm  types  with  sep- 
arate objectives. 

The  orographic  (westerly)  storms  should  be  seeded  to  increase  the  efficiency 
of  the  storm,  thus  augmenting  the  amount  of  precipitation  resulting  from  these 
systems.  The  procedure  would  be  to  seed  the  storms  at  light  seeding  rates  to 
avoid  overseeding.  Seeding  would  be  done  with  surface  seeding  generators  and, 
under  certain  circumstances,  with  airborne  seeding  generators. 

It  was  recommended  that  the  convective  storms  (southerly)  be  seeded  to  in- 
crease precipitation  at  higher,  colder  elevations,  primarily  through  redistribu- 
tion, providing  a  greater  total  precipitation  for  storage  in  the  snowpack.  These 
storms  will  be  seeded  heavily,  with  the  object  of  altering  the  distribution  of  pre- 
cipitation with  respect  to  altitude,  thus  increasing  the  snowpack.  In  addition  to 
seeding  the  general  orographic  background  of  these  storms  by  surface  generators, 
the  pilot  program  would  seed  the  updraft  areas  of  the  imbedded  convective  cells 
heavily  with  high-output  airborne  generators.18 

The  specific  meteorological  hypotheses  to  be  tested  by  the  Sierra  ex- 
periment are  that : 17 

1.  Seeding  will  increase  the  average  precipitation  on  treated  sample 
events  as  compared  to  the  untreated  events. 

2.  Seeding  will  increase  the  average  elevation  of  maximum  pre- 
cipitation on  treated  sample  events  as  compared  to  untreated  events. 

3.  Seeding  will  increase  the  average  duration  of  precipitation  and/ 
or  the  rate  of  precipitation  on  treated  sample  events  as  compared  with 
the  untreated  events. 

It  is  intended  that  the  design  and  evaluation  of  the  SCPP  will  be  a 
continuing  process  over  a  period  of  7  years,  constituting  a  major 
feature  in  the  step-by-step  research  in  the  pilot  project.18  The  primary 
hypotheses  of  the  program  as  well  as  physical  parameters  which 
accompany  successful  or  unsuccessful  events,  will  be  tested  in  the 
SCPP  evaluation.  Basic  parameters  to  be  tested  statistically  are : 19 

1.  The  average  precipitation  accumulation. 

2.  The  elevation  of  the  maximum  precipitation  band. 

15  Ibid.,  pp.  1-3. 

16  Ibid.,  p.  15. 
«  Ibid. 

"U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  "SCPP  Continuing  Dosij;n 
Contract."  Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project  Newsletter.  No.  6.  May  1977.  Denver.  Colo.,  p.  2. 

19  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  "A  Status  Report  :  The  Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Proj- 
ect," 1977,  p.  27. 


265 


3.  The  average  total  storm  duration,  the  average  duration  of  pre- 
cipitation during  the  first  and  last  days  of  the  storm,  and  the  average 
rate  of  precipitation. 

The  regions  that  are  expected  to  be  affected  in  the  Sierra  project 
are  shown  in  figure  8.  Region  1  is  the  primary  area  of  effect ;  region 
2  is  the  downwind  area  recommended  for  monitoring  extra- area  effects ; 
and  region  3,  situated  below  1,220  meters  (4,000  ft.)  elevation  in  the 
American  River  basin,  is  intended  to  provide  real-time  precipitation 
data  as  input  for  the  declaration  of  an  experimental  unit  and  to 
provide  better  definition  of  the  precipitation  distribution  within  the 
drainage  basin.20 


40 


40.0 


39.5 


39.0 


38.5 


38.0 


KILOMETERS 


40  MILES 


VIRGINIA 
MTS.  /\\ 


REGION  2 
EXTRA  AREA  EFFECTS 


^  VIRGINIA 
.CARSON  VN  RANGE 
GRANGE    $  RANGE 

LAKEA  'A  P|NE 

TAHOEA  A  NUT 

*  > 


121.0 


120.5 


120.0 
LONGITUDE 


119.5 


119.0 


Figure  8. — Map  of  the  Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project  region,  showing  the  three 
geographical  areas  in  the  project  (see  text).  (From  Bure  iu  of  Reclamation, 
Sierra  Cooperative  Pilot  Project,  status  report,  February  1977.) 

2U  Ibid.,  pp.  24-25. 


266 


The  planning  and  design  phase  of  the  Sierra  project  continues,  and 
during  the  winter  of  19  f 6-77,  field  tests  were  conducted  that  were 
necessary  for  design  of  field  operations.  During  the  1977-78  winter  sea- 
son collection  of  field  data  under  prerandomized  seeding  conditions 
should  be  completed ;  operating  procedures  will  be  tested  and  refined ; 
equipment  will  be  installed,  tested,  and  calibrated;  concepts  for  co- 
ordinating with  operating  programs  in  the  area  will  be  developed; 
transport  and  diffusion  studies  will  continue;  and  changes  in  design 
will  continue  as  a  result  of  the  increased  knowledge  acquired  from  the 
research  of  the  previous  year.21  If  the  preceding  activities  have  been 
accomplished  successfully  and  weather  conditions  permit,  randomized 
seeding  will  begin  in  the  1978-79  season.  From  historic  storm  patterns 
it  has  been  estimated  that  5  to  7  years  of  randomized  seeding  will  be 
necessary  to  obtain  a  data  base  suitable  for  confirmation  of  the  ex- 
pected increases  at  a  significant  level.  During  this  period  monitoring 
programs  and  environmental  studies  will  be  designed  and  implemented. 
There  will  be  continued  dialog  with  concerned  officials  and  the  general 
public  in  the  project  area,  and  hopefully  many  answers  will  be  ob- 
tained tu  societal,  economic,  and  environmental  questions.22 

Drought  mitigation  assistance 

Drought  emergency  relief  was  requested  by  the  Governors  of  a  num- 
ber of  Western  States  during  the  summer  of  1971.  In  partial  response 
to  this  request,  the  President's  Office  of  Emergency  Preparedness  di- 
rected the  Bureau  to  conduct  emergency  precipitation  stimulation 
operations  in  Arizona,  Oklahoma,  and  Texas.  Skywater  personnel 
have  also  provided  scientific  consulting  services  for  rain  augmentation 
programs  in  Lebanon,  Brazil,  India,  Tasmania,  and  Jamaica.23 

A  recent  program,  not  part  of  Project  Skywater,  was  administered 
by  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  under  which  grants  were  given  to 
States  to  support  weather  modification  activities  undertaken  to  miti- 
gate impacts  of  the  1976-77  drought.  Temporary  authorities  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  facilitate  various  emergency  actions  were 
provided  by  Public  Law  95-18,  amended  by  Public  Law  95-107, 
enacted  April  7,  1977,  and  August  17,  1977,  respectively.  Authority 
was  granted  to  appropriate  $100  million  for  a  program  which  included 
short-term  actions  to  increase  water  supplies.  Funds  made  available 
were  to  be  used  to  repair,  replace,  or  improve  affected  water-supply 
facilities  and  to  establish  a  water  bank  of  available  water  for  rehabili- 
tation. The  Bureau  implemented  the  act,  publishing  rules  for  emer- 
gency loans,  grants,  and  deferrals  under  the  Emergency  Drought  Act 
of  1977  in  the  Federal  Register.24  Procedures  were  established  under 
.sections  423.18  and  423.20  of  these  rules  for  State  water  resource  agen- 
cies to  apply  for  nonreimbursable  funds  for  studies  and  other  actions 
to  augment  water  supplies.  Bequests  wore  received  during  the  period 
of  availability  from  six  States  for  funds  to  support  weather  modifica- 
tion  activities.  Table  12  shows  the  amount  of  funds  approved  for  each 
State  for  weather  modification  projects  under  this  provision.25 

21  Ibid.,  p.  47. 

22  Ibid. 

23  Kahan.  Archie  M..  testimony  in  :  U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives,  Committee 
on  Science  and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  "Weath- 
er Modification."  hearings.  04th  Congress.  2d  session,  June  15-18,  1977.  Washington,  D.C., 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1976.  p.  194. 

■*  Federal  Register,  vol.  42,  No.  72.  Thursday,  Apr.  14,  1977,  pp.  19609  -19613. 
^  Private  communication  from  James  L.  Kerr.  Washington  Representative,  Office  of  At- 
mospheric Water  Resources,  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  November  1977. 


267 


Table  12. — Funds  provided  for  States  for  weather  modification-  projects  by  the 
Bureau  of  Reclamation,  under  provisions  of  the  Emergency  Drought  Act  of 
1977. 

Colorado   $600,000 

California   300,000 

Kansas    300,000 

Nevada    232,720 

North  Dakota   186,133 

Utah   553,  500 

Total    2, 172,  353 


NATIONAL  SCIENCE  FOUNDATION 

Introduction  and  general 

Under  its  Research  Applied  to  National  Needs  (RANN)  program, 
the  National  Science  Foundation  (NSF)  has  in  recent  years  developed 
improved  capabilities  to  stimulate  research  efforts  immediately  and 
directly  related  to  problems  of  society.  This  program,  which  dealt  pri- 
marily with  problem-oriented  research,  focussed  scientific  and  tech- 
nological resources  on  selected  problems  of  national  importance  in  an 
attempt  to  assist  in  their  solution  in  a  timely  and  practical  manner. 
RANN's  areas  of  emphasis  included  the  major  category  of  environ- 
mental programs,  under  which  most  of  the  NSF-sponsored  research 
in  weather  modification  had  until  recently  been  located.26 

The  NSF  program  in  weather  modification  supports  a  broad  range 
of  research,  extending  across  the  disciplines  of  economic,  social,  politi- 
cal, legal,  environmental,  mathematical,  and  physical  sciences.27  The 
overall  goal  of  the  program  is  "to  establish  the  concept  of  weather 
modification  as  a  tool  to  help  fulfill  societal  needs,-'  and,  to  accomplish 
this  goal,  the  program  supports  research  on  the  following  five  program 
objectives: 28 

1.  To  establish  the  feasibility  of,  and  improve  the  technology  for, 
mitigating  the  undesirable  effects  of  selected  weather  hazards. 

2.  To  delineate  the  cause,  extent,  and  impact  of  inadvertent  weather 
modification  and  to  subsequently  develop  ways  to  use  land  and  energy 
resources  to  achieve  more  desirable  responses  in  weather  and  climate. 

3.  To  develop  an  improved  capability  to  design,  perform,  and  evalu- 
ate weather  modification  experiments. 

4.  To  investigate  the  impact  of  weather  modification  on  society. 

5.  To  develop  specific  applications  of  weather  modification  to  in- 
crease agricultural  production. 

Table  13  is  a  summary  of  weather  modification  research  funding  and 
projected  funding  from  fiscal  year  1976  through  fiscal  year  1978  for  the 
National  Science  Foundation. 

26  In  the  reorganization  of  the  RANN  Directorate  in  the  NSF  to  the  Applied  Science  and1 
Research  Applications  (ASRA)  Directorate,  effective  February  1978,  the  NSF  weather  modi- 
fication program  was  transferred  to  the  basic  research  Astronomical,  Atmospheric,  Earth, 
and  Ocean  Sciences  (AAEO)  Directorate.  Division  of  Atmospheric  Sciences. 

27  Downie.  Currie  S.  and  Richard  A.  Dirks,  National  Science  Foundation  weather  modi- 
fication program,  papers  presented  at  the  second  WMO  Scientific  Conference  on  Weather 
Modification,  Boulder,  Colo.,  Aug.  2-6,  1976.  World  Meteorological  Organization,  Geneva, 
Switzerland,  p.  557. 

28  Ibid. 


268 


TABLE  13.— WEATHER  MODIFICATION  FUNDING  FOR  FISCAL  YEAR  1976  THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1978  FOR  THE 

NATIONAL  SCIENCE  FOUNDATION ' 

[In  thousands  of  dollars) 


Fiscal  year— 

iy/b 

197T 

1977 

1978 

Precipitation  modification   

532 

0 

681 

150 

Fop  and  cloud  modification  

0 

88 

110 

0 

Hail  suppression   

3, 081 

488 

2,950 

1,180 

Social,  economic,  lepal,  and  environmental   

24I8 

60 

287 

150 

Inadvertent  modification  

1,153 

101 

629 

600 

Support  and  services    

1,032 

373 

1,045 

170 

6,216 

1,110 

5,  702 

2,250 

1  From  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  21— fiscal  year  1978,  p.  94. 

2  Includes  technology  assessment  of  hail  suppression. 


The  RANN  weather  modification  program  dealt  with  a  number 
of  specific,  critical  research  topics  and  was  dedicated  to  development  of 
improved  technology  in  support  of  societal  needs,  transfer  of  this  tech- 
nology to  potential  users,  and  exploration  of  the  impacf  of  weather 
modification  on  society ;  however,  the  program  is  not  all  encompassing. 
In  addition  to  the  RANN-supported  research,  the  NSF  supported 
weather  modification  through  its  basic  research  program  in  meteorol- 
ogy and  through  the  atmospheric  research  facilities  at  the  National 
Center  for  Atmospheric  Research  (NCAR)  at  Boulder,  Colo.29 

The  NSF  weather  modification  program  is  coordinated  with  weather 
modification  programs  of  other  Federal  agencies  through  the  Inter- 
departmental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS)  Panel  on 
Weather  Modification  and  through  numerous  and  frequent  contacts 
with  representatives  of  the  other  Federal  agencies.  In  1975  an  NSF 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Panel  was  formed,  composed  of  rep- 
resentatives from  the  Department  of  the  Interior  (Buearu  of  Reclama- 
tion), the  Department  of  Commerce  (National  Oceanic  and  Atmos- 
pheric Administration) ,  the  academic  community,  commercial  weather 
modifiers,  and  industry.  The  Panel  was  formed  to  provide  technical 
advice  to  the  NSF  program  manager  for  weather  modification  and  to 
assist  in  coordinating  the  program  with  other  agencies.30  As  part  of  the 
concerted  effort  throughout  the  executive  branch  to  eliminate  advisory 
panels,  the  NSF  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Panel  was  recently 
abolished. 

Public  Law  85-510  of  July  11,  1958,  directed  the  NSF  "to  initiate 
and  support  a  program  of  study,  research,  and  evaluation  in  the  field  of 
weather  modification."  31  The  Foundation  promptly  responded  in  es- 
tablishing the  new  program,  then  within  its  broader  program  for  at- 
mospheric sciences,  and  expended  $1,141,000  for  research  and  evalua- 
tion in  weather  modification  in  fiscal  year  1959. 32  In  designing  the  pro- 
gram the  advice  and  assistance  of  outstanding  scientists  and  engineers 
were  sought,  and  an  Advisory  Panel  for  Weather  Modification  was  ap- 

20  Ibid. 

30  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77.  n.  9.r>. 

31  See  earlier  section  of  this  chapter  for  discussion  of  this  and  other  Federal  legislation 
on  weather  modification. 

32  National  Science  Foundation,  "Weather  Modification";  first  annual  report  for  fiscal 
year  ended  June  30,  1959,  NSF  60-24,  p.  3. 


269 


pointed.  In  an  early  report  to  the  Director  of  the  NSF,  the  Chairman 
of  the  Advisory  Panel,  Dr.  Reuben  G.  Gustavson,  stated : 33 

Placing  this  important  field  of  research  under  the  aegis  of  the  National  Science 
foundation  has  given  rise  to  a  new  hope  and  confidence  that  the  instability  fac- 
ors  in  regard  to  size  and  time  of  support  will  be  removed.  This  is  already  bring- 
ng  young  imaginative  workers  into  the  field.  The  rate  of  advance  will  to  a  large 
neasure  depend  upon  the  quality  of  the  trained  scientists  attracted  to  the  prob- 
.eni.  If  good  scientists  are  to  be  attracted  into  the  program,  the  Foundation  must 
be  particularly  concerned  about  the  financial  stability  of  the  program. 

The  effect  of  Public  Law  85-510  was  to  make  the  NSF  the  Federal 
lead  agency  in  weather  modification,  since  there  were  research  pro- 
grams underway  in  a  number  of  other  agencies.  Historically  the  NSF 
program  has  provided  the  largest  measure  of  Federal  support  to  all 
aspects  of  weather  modification  research  over  the  years  since  establish- 
ment of  its  program.  When  Public  Law  90-407  of  July  18,  1968, 
amended  the  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950,  the  specific 
mandate  for  NSF  to  support  a  weather  modification  program  and  the 
attendant  lead  agency  role  were  effectively  repealed.  The  further  re- 
quirements, established  earlier  by  Public  Law  85-510,  that  activities 
in  weather  modification  in  the  United  States  be  reported  to  the  NSF 
and  that  the  Foundation  should  publish  an  annual  report  to  the  Con- 
gress, were  also  terminated  with  the  passage  of  Public  Law  90-407. 
During  the  years  when  NSF  was  lead  agency  for  weather  modification, 
10  annual  reports  were  published,  the  last  one  covering  fiscal  year 
1968.34 

Following  passage  of  the  1968  law,  the  NSF  continued  to  support 
basic  and  applied  research  in  weather  modification  under  the  broad 
authority  of  the  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950  as  amended 
by  Public  Law  90— 1-07.  About  one-third  of  the  total  Federal  support 
for  weather  modification  has  been  provided  by  the  NSF. 

When  the  Research  Applied  to  National  Needs  (RANN)  Direc- 
torate was  established  within  the  Foundation  in  1971  "to  bring  the 
resources  of  science  and  technology  to  bear  on  selected  important  na- 
tional problems,5' 35  most  of  the  weather  modification  research  was 
transferred  from  the  basic  atmospheric  science  program  to  RANN. 
While  nearly  all  of  this  research  was  managed  under  RANN 
by  the  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology, two  major  studies  were  sponsored  by  RANN's  Division 
of  Exploratory  Research  and  Technology  Assessment,  which  "sup- 
ports research  and  assessment  to  provide  greater  visibility  to  the  longer 
range  social,  environmental,  and  economic  impacts  of  new  technology 
applications  and  to  identify  and  analyze  emerging  national  problems 
that  may  be  avoided  or  ameliorated  by  science  and  technology."  36 

The  first  of  these  two  technology  assessment  studies  was  initiated  in 
1971  in  response  to  a  request  from  the  Interdepartmental  Committee 
for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS)  to  explore  the  feasibility  of  apply- 
ing technology  assessment  concepts  to  planned  weather  modification 
operational  projects.  ICAS  suggested  that  the  first  project  for  such  a 
technology  assessment  might  be  the  planned  project  of  the  Bureau  of 

33  Itrd. 

34  National  Science  Foundation.  "Weather  Modification:  Tenth  Annual  Report  for  Fiscal 
Yenr  Ended  June  30,  1968."  NSF  69-18.  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Washington,  D.C., 
1969.  141  pp. 

30  National  Science  Foundation.  "Twentv-sixth  Annual  Report,  for  Fiscal  Year  1976," 
NSF  77-1.  Washington  D.C..  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1977.  p.  So. 

36  National  Science  Foundation.  "Guide  to  Programs  :  Fiscal  Year  1978,"  Washington, 
DC,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1977,  p.  "51. 


270 


Reclamation  to  augment  the  flow  of  the  Colorado  River  by  seeding 
orographic  clouds  to  increase  snowpack  in  the  Upper  Colorado  River 
Basin,  since  the  pilot  experiment  was  already  underway  in  the  San 
Juan  Mountain  Range  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  needed  in- 
formation to  make  a  decision  on  implementation  in  the  near  future.37 
The  contract  for  the  assessment  was  funded  and  monitored  by  NSF, 
the  Stanford  Research  Institute  being  selected  to  undertake  the  study, 
with  assistance  from  the  University  of  California  at  Davis  and  a  num- 
ber of  consultants.  The  final  report  was  published  in  1974.38 

The  second  major  study  was  an  extensive  technology  assessment  of 
hail  suppression  in  the  United  States.  This  project  was  initiated  in 
August  1975  and  became  known  as  the  Technology  Assessment  of 
the  Suppression  of  Hail  (TASH).  The  NSF  grant  was  to  the  Univer- 
sity of  Illinois;  however,  a  number  of  other  institutions  and  individ- 
uals were  involved  in  the  study  through  subcontracts  or  consulting 
agreements.  Total  funding  for  the  18-month  project  included  $290,500 
from  NSF  and  $60,000  from  the  State  of  Illinois.39  The  final  report 
of  the  TASH  study  was  published  in  April  1977.40 

Table  II  is  a  listing  of  awards  in  weather  modification  research  by 
the  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Technology 
for  fiscal  year  1973  through  the  1976  transition  quarter.  The  XSF 
weather  modification  program  has  been  divided  into  five  major  areas 
under  which  the  numerous  research  projects  have  been  categorized. 
These  areas,  corresponding  to  the  five  program  objectives  stated 
earlier,  are  :  (1)  weather  hazard  mitigation  studies  on  such  phenomena 
as  hail,  thunderstorms,  lightning,  and  tornadoes  and  an  attempt  to 
prevent  or  lessen  damage  from  such  storms;  (2)  weather  modification 
technology  development ;  designed  to  improve  methods  for  modifying 
the  weather  and  of  evaluating  results  of  weather  modification  efforts; 
(3)  inadvertent  weather  modification  investigations  to  delineate  the 
cause,  extent,  and  impact  of  urban-industrial  influences,  such  as  heat, 
moisture,  aerosols,  and  surface  roughness,  on  the  weather;  (I)  socie- 
tal utilization  activities  which  relate  the  impact  of  weather  on  man. 
provide  goal  orientation,  and  achieve  the  societal  interface  for  suc- 
cessful weather  modification  applications;  and  (5)  an  agricultural 
weather  modification  program  which  includes  developing  techniques 
for  exerting  influence  on  agricultural  systems  at  critical  points  during 
the  planting,  growing,  and  harvesting  seasons  in  order  to  expand  agri- 
cultural production.41  Each  of  these  major  program  divisions  will  be 
discussed  in  the  following  sections. 

37  Weisbecker.  Leo  W.  (compiler).  "The  Impacts  of  Snow  Enhancement;  Technology 
Assessment  of  Winter  Orographic  Snowpack  Augmentation  in  the  Upper  Colorado  River 
Basin."  Norman,  Okla.,  University  of  Oklahoma  Press,  1974,  p.  v. 

wIbld.,  024  pp.  (A  summary  of  the  report  was  also  published  separately:  Weisbecker. 
Leo  W..  "Snowpack.  Cloud  Seeding,  and  the  Colorado  River  ;  Technology  Assessment  of 
Weather  Modification."  Norman,  Okla..  University  of  Oklahoma  Press.  1974*.  80  pp.) 

39  Changnon.  Stanley  A.,  Jr..  Ray  Jay  Davis.  Barbara  C.  Farhar.  J.  Eugene  Haas.  J.  Lore- 
ena  Ivens.  Martin  V.  Jones.  Donald  A.  Klein.  Dean  Mann,  Griffith  M.  Morgan.  Jr..  Steven  T. 
Sonka.  Earl  R.  Swanson.  C  Robert  Ta.vlor.  and  Jon  Van  Blokiand  "Hail  Suppression  ;  Im- 
pacts and  Issues."  Urbana.  111..  Illinois  State  Water  Survey.  April  1977.  pp.  i-iii. 

40  Ibid..  432  pp..  (A  summary  of  the  report  was  also  published  in  1977:  Farhar.  Bar- 
bara ('..  Stanley  A.  Changnon.  Jr..  Earl  R.  Swanson,  Ray  J.  Davis,  and  J.  Eugene  Haas, 
"Hail  Suppression  and  Society,"  Urbana,  111..  Illinois  State  Water  Survev,  June  1977, 
2:3  pp.) 

41  Federal  Council  for  Selenee  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77.  p.  95. 


271 


Table  14 —Summary  of  Weathe-  Modification  Research  Awards  by  NSF/RANN  for  Fiscal  Year  1973  through  1976  Transitional 
Quarter.  (Data  from  Annual  Summaries  of  Awards,  RANN,  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology.) 


Principal  investigator/ 
institution 


Title 


Effective  date 


Duration 
(months) 


Amount 


FISCAL  YEAR  1973  AWARDS 

Firor,  John  W.,  National  Center  for 
Atmospheric  Research,  Boulder, 
Colo. 


Jayaweera,  K.O.L.F.,  University  of 
Alaska,  College,  Alaska. 

Sikdar,  Dhirendra  N.,  University  of 
Wisconsin-Madison,  Madison, 
Wis. 

Boone,  Larry  M.,  Department  of 
Agriculture,  Wash  ngton,  D.C. 

Taubenfeld,  Howard  J.,  Southern 
Methodist  University,  Dallas,  Tex. 

Haas,  J.  E.,  University  of  Colorado, 
Boulder,  Colo. 

Corrin,  Myron  L.,  Colorado  State 
UnrVersity,  Fort  Collins,  Colo. 

Grant,  Lewis  0.,  Colorado  State  Uni- 
versity, Fort  Collins,  Colo. 

Barchet,  Wm.  Richard,  University 
of  Wisconsin-Madison,  Madison, 
Wis. 

McQuigg,  James  D.,  University  of 
Missouri-Columbia,  Columbia,  Mo. 

Corrin,  Myron  L.,  Colorado  State  Uni- 
versity, Fort  Collins,  Colo. 

Warburton,  Joseph  A.,  Desert  Re- 
search I nstitute,  Reno,  Nev. 

Hobbs,  Peter  V.,  University  of  Wash- 
ington, Seattle,  Wash. 

Veal,'  Donald  L.,  University  of  Wyo- 
ming, Laramie,  Wyo. 

Changnon,  Stanley  A.  University  of 
Illinois-Urbana,  Urbana,  III. 

Steele,  Roger  L.,  Desert  Research 
I nstituta.  Reno,  Nev. 

Plooster,  Myron  N.,  University  of 
Denver,  Denver,  Colo. 

Changnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr.,  University 
of  Illinois-Urbana,  Urbana,  III. 

Peterson,  D.  F.,  Utah  State  Univer- 
sity, Logan,  Utah. 

Weickmann,  Helmut  K.,  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admin- 
istration, Boulder,  Colo. 

Moore,  Charles,  B.,  New  Mexico 
Institute  of  Mining  and  Technolo- 
gy, Socorro,  N.  Mex. 

Braham,  Roscoe  R.,  Jr.,  University 
of  Chicago,  Chicago,  III. 

Chessin,  Henry,  State  University  at 
Albany,  Albany,  N.Y. 

Uthe,  Edward  E.,  Stanford  Research 
Institute,  Menlo  Park,  Calif. 

Klein,  Donald  A.,  Colorado  State 
University,  Fort  Collins,  Colo. 

Auer.  August  H.,  Jr.,  University  of 

Wyoming,  Laramie,  Wyo. 
Ochs,  Harry  T.,  Ill,  University  of 

Illinois-Urbana,  Urbana,  III. 

FISCAL  YEAR  1974  AWARDS 

Anderson,  C.  E.,  University  of 
Wisconsin. 


Auer,  August  H. 
Wyoming. 


University  of 


Contract  for  the  management,  opera-   Aug.  1,  1972   12  $2,700,000 

tion,  and  maintenance  of  the  Na- 
tional Center  for  Atmospheric  Re- 
search (funds  for  national  hail  re- 
search experiment  program). 

Prevention  of  ice  fog  formation  by  ;n-  Sept.  1,  1972   12  17, 600 

ducing  cloud  cover— Feasibility 
study  in  Fairbanks. 

Study  of  the  features  and  energy   Oct.  1,  1972   12  96,900 

budgets  of  northeastern  Colorado 
hailstones. 

Economic   and   institutional   con-   Oct.  15, 1972   12  65,000 

siderations  of  suppressing  hail. 
Study  group  on  the  societal  conse-   Nov.  1,  1972   12  64,400 

quences  of  weather  modification. 
A  comparative  analysis  of  publicsup-   Dec.  1,  1972   20  60,700 

port  of  and  resistance  to  weather 

modification  projects. 
Heterogeneous  ice  nuclei.  ..  do   12  49,800 

Precipitation    augmentation    from  Jan.  1,  1973   12  281,400 

orographically  induced  clouds  and 
cloud  systems. 

Precipitation  process  modification   Feb.  15,  1973   12         55,  600 

through  ice  nucleus  deactivation. 

Weather  modification  management  do   12  42,000 

guidelines. 

Laboratory  cloud  simulation  to  sup-   Mar.  1,  1973   12  112,600 

port  weather  modification  research 
and  field  programs. 

Silver  iodide  seeding  rates  and  snow-  do   12  80,100 

pack  augmentation. 

Physical  evaluation  of  cloud  seeding  Apr.  1,  1973   15  182,000 

techniques  for  modifying  orogra- 
phic snowfall  (the  Cascade  project). 

Development  of  leaf-derived   ice  do    12  70,000 

nuclei  for  weather  modification. 

Design  of  a  hail  suppression  experi-  do    12  142,200 

ment  in  Illinois. 

Sequence  effects  of  heterogeneous  Apr.  15, 1973   12         71,  000 

nucleation. 

M.crophysics— Diffusion  interaction  do   39,900 

in  ice  nuclei  plumes. 

Studies  of  urban  effects  on  rainfall   do   12  211,400 

and  severe  weather. 

Workshop  on  inadvertent  weather   May  1,  1973   12  29,900 

modification. 

Installation    and   maintenance  of    May  22, 1973   6  39,033 

ground  network  for  national  hail 
research  experiment. 

Origin  and  role  of  electricity  in  clouds.  June  1,  1973   12        170,  800 

Inadvertent  weather  modification  in  do   12  275,000 

the  St.  Louis  area. 

Development  of  cloud  seeding  tech-  do   12         33,  500 

nology  utilizing  modified  silver 
iodide  structures. 

Lidar— Radiometric  study  of  urban  do   12  54,100 

atmospheric  processes  related  to 
climatic  modification. 

Microbiological   impacts  of  silver   July  1,  1973   12  67,600 

iodide  used  in  weather  modifica- 
tion. 

Modification  of  convective  cloud  do   12         61,  300 

activity  by  an  urban  area. 
2-dimensional    cloud    modeling—  July  1,  1972   12  117,700 

Application  to  urban  effects  on 

precipitation. 

Study  of  the  features  and  energy   Oct.  1, 1973   12        100,  000 

budgets  of  northeastern  Colorado 
hailstorms. 

Modification  of  convective  cloud  Apr.  1,  1974   12  132,000 

activity. 


272 


Table  14.  Summary  of  Weather  Modification  Research  Awards  by  NSF/RANN,  for  Fiscal  Year  1973  through  1976  Transitional 
Quarter,  (Data  from  Annual  Summaries  of  Awards,  RANN,  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology.)—Continued 

Principal  investigator/  Duration 

institution  Title  Effective  date        (months)  Amount 

FISCAL  YEAR  1974  AWARDS— Continued 

Barchet,  William  R.,  University  of   Precipitation  process  modification   Feb.  15,  1973  

Wisconsin.                               through  ice  nucleus  deactivation. 
Boone,  Larry  M.,  U.S.  Department   Economic  and  institutional  consid-   Oct.  1,  1973  

of  Agriculture.                           erations  of  suppressing  hail. 
Braham,  Roscoe  R.,  Jr.,  University   Inadvertent  weather  modification  in   Apr.  1,  1974  

of  Chicago.                               the  St.  Louis  area. 
Changnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr.,  University  Studies  of  urban  effects  on  rainfall  do  

of  Illinois.  and  severe  weather. 

Design  of  a  hail  suppression  experi-  June  1,  1973  

ment  in  Illinois. 

Chessin,  Henry,  State  University  of  Development  of  cloud  seeding  tech-  do  

N.Y.  nology  utilizing  modified  silver 

iodide  structures. 

Chisholm,  John  P.,  Sierra  Nevada   An  accurate  and  inexpensive  air-   July  1,  1974  

Corp.                                     borne  windfinding  system. 
Corrin,  Myron  L.,  Colorado  State   Heterogeneous  ice  nuclei  develop-   Oct.  1,  1973  

University.  ment. 
Davis,   Briant  L.,  South   Dakota   Chemical  complexing  of  silver  iodide-  Sept.  1,  1972  

School  of  Mines  and  Technology.       alkali  iodide  aerosols  prepared  for 
cloud  seeding  purposes. 

Dennis,  Arnett  S.,  South  Dakota   Numerical  analysis  of  proposed  hail  Sept.  1,  1971  

School  of  Mines  and  Technology.       suppression  concepts. 
Firor,  John  W.,  National  Center  for   National  hail  research  experiment..   July  1,  1973  

Atmospheric  Research. 

Fujita,  Theodore  T.,  University  of   Basic  research  on  tornadoes  relevant  Sept.  1,  1971  

Chicago.                                  to  their  modification. 
Fukuta,    Norihiko,    University   of  Development  of  cloud  seeding  gen-   July  15,  1973  

Denver.  erators  for  biodegradeable  organic 

ice  nuclei. 

Grant,  Lewis  0.,  Colorado  State   Extended  area  effects  from  local   Mar.  1,  1974  

University.  weather  modification. 

Cloud  simulation  and  aerosol  lab-   Apr.  4,  1974  

oratory. 

Haas,  J.  Eugene,  Human  Ecology  A  comparative  analysis  of  public  re-  Aug.  1,  1974  

Research  Services,  Inc.  action  to  weather  modification 

projects. 

Hobbs,   Peter  V.,   University  of   Orographic  snowfall  in  the  Cascade  Apr.  1,  1973  

Washington.  project. 

Klein,  Donald  A.(  Colorado  State   Management  of  silver  iodide  used  in   July  1,  1974  

University.  weather  modification:  Develop- 

ment in  microbial  threshold  tox- 
icity criteria. 

Little,  Gordon  C,  National  Oceanic   Operating  two  dual-Doppler  radars  June  1,  1974  

and  Atmospheric  Administration.      in  conjunction  with  the  1974 
summer  operations. 

McQuigg,  James  D.,  University  of  Weather  modification  guidelines         Feb.  15,  1974  

Missouri. 

Moore,  Charles  B.,  New  Mexico   Lightning  protection  systems  and   May  15,  1974  

Institute  of  Mining  and  Tech-      thunderstorm  electrification, 
nology. 

Mordy,  Wendell  A.,  Center  for  the  A  program  of  social  science  research   Oct.  1,  1973  

Future.  coordination  and  goal  evaluation 

for  Metromex. 

Ochs,  Harry  T.,  Ill,  University  of  Supportive  modeling  of  urban  effects   July  1,  1974..  

Illinois.                                   on  precipitation. 
Plooster,  Myron  N.,  University  of   Microphysics — Diffusion  interaction   Apr.  15,  1974  

Denver.                                  in  ice  nuclei  plumes 
Schaefer,  Vincent  J.,  State  University  Second  inadvertent  weather  modifi-  April  1,  1974  

of  New  York                             cation  workshop. 
Schickendanz,  Paul  T.,  Illinois  State   Climatic  alterations  in  the  Great  June  1,  1974  

Water  Survey.  Plains  due  to  widespread  irriga- 

tion. 

Simpson,   Joanne,   University   of   Evaluation  and  design  of  weather  July  1,  1974  

Virginia.                                  modification  experiments. 
Steele,    Roger   L.,   University  of  Sequence  effects  of  heterogeneous  April  15,  1974  

Nevada  nucleation. 
Taubenfeld,  Howard  J.,  Southern  Study  group  on  the  societal  conse-   Oct.  1,  1973  

Methodist  University.  quences  of  weather  modification. 

Veal,    Donald    L.,    University   of   Development  of  leaf-derived   ice  Apr.  1,  1973  

Wyoming.                                nuclei  for  weather  modification. 
Warburton,  Joseph  A.,  University  of  Silver  iodide  seeding  rates  and  snow-   Mar.  1,  1973  

Nevada.  pack  augmentation. 

FISCAL  YEAR  1975  AWARDS 

Inadvertent  weather  modification: 

Auer,  August  H.,  University  of  Modification  of  convective  cloud  activ-   Apr.  1,  1975  

Wyoming.  ity  by  an  urban  area. 

Braham,  Roscoe  R.,  Jr.,  Uni-  Inadvertent  weather  modification  in  do   

versity  of  Chicago.  the  St.  Louis  area. 


12 

t^s  finn 

$JJ,  ouu 

15 

54, 000 

243,  000 

12 

237,  500 

12 

33,  500 

12 

33,  500 

12 

44,  400 

12 

49,  800 

24 

103,900 

24 

86,  300 

12 

2,  000,  000 

OA 

55  400 

12 

106,  900 

9 

250,  000 

6 

4,  000 

2 

22, 800 

15 

182,  000 

0 

3 

16  900 

1  0 

in  nnn 

1U,  UUU 

12 

42,  000 

1  0 

1JU, uuu 

3 

15,000 

9 

/ 0,  UUU 

12 

39,  S00 

24 

it  nnn 
jj,  UUU 

24 

55,  500 

12 

50, 000 

12 

71,000 

12 

60,  800 

12 

70,  000 

12 

80, 100 

10 

134,300 

12 

261,000 

273 


Table  14.  Summary  of  Weather  Modification  Research  Awards  by  NSF/RANN,  for  Fiscal  Year  1973  through  1976  Transitional 
Quarter.  (Data  fiom  Annual  Summaries  of  Awards,  RANN,  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology.)—Continued 


Principal  investigator/  Duration 

institution  Title  Effective  date        (months)  Amount 


FISCAL  YEAR  1975  AWARDS— Continued 
Inadvertent  weather  modification— Continued 

Chagnon,  Stanley  A.,  University  Studies  of  urban  effects  on  rainfall   Apr.  1,  1975   12  $257,200 

of  Illinois.  and  severe  weather. 

Gossard,    Earl    E.,   National  Dual-Doppler  radar  investigation  of  June  15,  1975   12  60,000 

Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Ad-  wind  flow  patterns  in  Metromex. 

ministration. 

Ochs,  Harry  T.,  University  of  Numerical  cloud  modeling  Apr.  1,  1975   10  63,400 

lllinios. 

Schickedanz,  Paul  T.,  Univer-  Climatic  alternations  in  the  Great  June  1,  1974   24  55,500 

sity  of  lllinios.  Plains  due  to  widespread  irriga- 
tion. 

Societal  utilization: 

Boone,  Larry  M.,  U.S.  Depart-  Economic  and  institutional  consider-   Oct.  1,  1973   15  54,500 

ment  of  Agriculture.  ations  of  suppressing  hail. 

Grant,  Lewis  O.,  Colorado  State  Extended  area  effects  from  local   Dec.  1,  1974   12  280,000 

University.  weather  modification. 

Haas,  J.  Eugene  Human  Ecology  A  comparative  analysis  of  public  re-   Oct.  1,  1974   12  76,000 

Research  Service.  action  to  weather  modification 
projects. 

Klein,  Donald  A.,  Colorado  State  Microbiological  impacts  of  silver  July  1,  1975  __  12  46,600 

University.  iodide  used  in  weather  modifica- 
tion. 

McQuigg,  James  D.,  University  Weather  modification  management  Aug.  1,  1974.   14  41,000 

of  Missouri.  guidelines. 

Mordy,  W.  A.,  Center  for  the  The  importance  of  climate  and   July  1,  1974   15  87,000 

Future.  weather  alterations  to  mankind. 

Morgan,  G.  M.,  University  of  Design  of  a  hail  suppression  experi-   Nov.  1,  1974   12  67,800 

Illinois.  ment  in  lllinios. 

Shaefer,  Vincent  J.,  State  Uni-  Second  inadvertent  weather  modi-  Apr.  1,  1974   12  33,000 

versity  of  New  York.  fication  workshop. 

Taubenfeld,  Howrad  J.,  Southern  Study  group  on  the  consequences  of  November  1974...           6  13,800 

Methodist  University.  weather  modification. 
Weather  hazard  mitigation: 

Atlas,  David,  National  Center  National  hail  research  experiment...  July  1975   12  2,130,000 

for  Atmospheric  Research. 

•Moore,  Charles  B.t  New  Mexico  Lightning  protection  and  thunder-   June  1,  1975   12  130,000 

Institute  of  Mining  and  Tech-  storm  electrification, 
nology. 

Weather  modification  systems: 

Anderson,  Charles  E.,  Univer-  Studies  on  the  dynamics,  micro-  Jan.  1,  1975..   12  96,000 

sity  of  Wisconsin.  physics,  and  forecasting  of  severe 
local  storms. 

Chisholm,  John  P.,  Sierra  fJe-  An  accurate  and  inexpensive  air-  July  1,  1974   9  44,400 

vada  Corp.  borne  windfinding  system. 

Davis,  Briant  L.,  Institute  of  Chemical  ccmplexing  of  silver  iodide-  Sept.  1,  1972   24  103,900 

Atmosphe  ric  Sciences.  alkali  iodide  aerosols  prepared  for 
cloud-seeding  purposes. 

Fukuta,  Norihiko,  University  of  Cloud-seeding  generators  for  bio-  July  15,  1974   12  100,400 

Denver.  degradable  organic  ice  nuclei. 

Grant,  Lewis  O.,  Colorado  State  Cloud  simulation  and  aerosol  lab-   Nov.  1,  1974   12  18,000 

University.  oratory. 

Little,  Gordon  C,  National  Oce-  Dual-Doppler  radar  investigations  of  July  1,  1974   12  60,000 

anic  and  Atmospheric  Ad-  wind  fields  in  severe  storms. 

ministration. 

Simpson,  Joanne,  University  of  Evaluation  and  design  of  weather  do   12  50,000 

Virginia.  modification  experiments. 

FISCAL  YEAR  1976  AWARDS 

Improved    weather  modification 
technology: 

Fukuta,  Norihiko,  University  of   Development  of  cloud-seeding  gen-   Aug.  1,  1975   12        133, 100 

Denver.  erators  for  biodegradable  organic 

ice  nuclei. 

Gossard,    Earl    E.,    National   Collection  and  processing  of  multiple   May  15,  1976   14.5  135,000 

Oceanic    and    Atmospheric      Doppler  radar  data  in  NHRE. 
Administration. 

Grant,  Lewis  O.  Colorado  State   Testing  and  calibration  program  for  July  1,  1975   12  10,800 

University.  cloud-seeding  materials,  seeding 

generators,  and  nucleus-observ- 
ing instruments. 

Simpson,   Joanne,   University   Evaluaion  and  design  of  weather   do   9  73,000 

of  Virginia.  modification  experiments. 

Silver  iodide  tracing  in  south  Florida   do   12  15,000 

Warburton,  Joseph  A.,  Denver  Silver  iodide  seeding  rates  and   do    6  49,900 

Research  Institute.  snowpack  augmentation. 

Inadvertent  weather  modification: 

Auer,  August  H.,  University  of   Lidar,  acoustic  sounder  and  radi-  July  15,  1975   12  52,800 

Wyoming.  ometer  investigation. 

Modification  of  convective  cloud   Feb.  1,  1976   14        178, 700 

activity  by  an  urban  area. 


274 


Table  14.  Summary  of  Weather  Modification  Research  Awards  by  NSF/RANN,  for  Fiscal  Year  1973  through  1976  Transitional 
Quarter. .(Data  from  Annual  Summaries  of  Awards,  RANN,  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology.)—Continued 


Principal  investigator/ 
institution 


Title 


Duration 

Effective  date        (months)  Amount 


FISCAL  YEAR  1976  AWARDS-Continued  ' 
Inadvertent  weather  modification— Continued 

Braham,  Roscoe  R.,  University   Inadvertent  weather  modification  in   Feb.  1,  1976.. 

of  Chicago.                          the  St.  Louis  area. 
Changnon,  Stanley  A.,   Uni-   Studies  of  urban  effects  on  rainfall  ...do_  

versity  of  Illinois.  and  severe  weather. 

Hobbs,   Peter,   University   of   Inadvertent  weather  modification  by  June  15,  1976. 

Washington.  effluents  from  coal-fired  electric 

powerplants. 

Ochs,  Harry  T.,  University  of   Numerical  cloud  modeling:  Applica-   Feb.  1,  1976.. 
Illinois.  tion  to  urban  effects  on  precipita- 

tion. 

Saxena,  V.  K.,  University  of   Airborne  mapping  of  urban  plume  of   May  15,  1976. 
Denver.  St.  Louis  with  a  cloud  condensa- 

tion nuclei  (CCN)  spectrometer. 

Social,  legal,  and  economic  impact  of 
weather  modification: 

Farhar,  Barbara, Human  Ecology   A  comparative  analysis  of  public   Dec.  1,  1975... 
Research  Services,  Inc.  response  to  weather  modification. 

Grant,  Lewis  0.,  Colorado  State   A  field  experiment  to  test  hypotheses  ...do  

University.  of  the  reality,  characteristic,  and 

magnitude  of  extended  area  effects 
from  weather  modification. 
Klein,  Donald  A.,  Colorado  State   Management  of  nucleating  agents   Oct.  1,  1975... 
University.  used  in  weather  modification:  De- 

velopment of  microbial  threshold 
toxicity  criteria. 

Weather  hazard  mitigation: 

Veal,  Donald,  National  Center   National  hal  research  experiment...   Aug.  1,  1975.. 
for  Atmospheric  Research. 
Weather  modification  in  support  of 
agriculture: 

Grant,  Lewis  0.,  Colorado  State   An  assessment  of  the  present  and   July  1,  1975.. 
University.  potential  role  in  weather  modifi- 

cation in  agricultural  production. 
Huff,  Floyd  A.,  University  of   Assessment  of  weather  modifica-   Nov.  1,  1975.. 
Illinois.  tion   in   alleviating  agricultural 

water  shortages  during  droughts. 


14 
14 
24 

14 

12 

15  82,000 
11  215,709 


12  2,361,000 


18  71,000 


FISCAL  YEAR  1976  TRANSITIONAL 
QUARTER  AWARDS 

I  mproved  weather  modification  tech- 
nology: 

Chisholm,  John,  Sierra  Nevada 
Corp. 

Hallett,   John,    University  of 
Nevada. 

Maki,  Leroy  R.,  University  of 
Wyoming. 
Inadvertent  weather  modification: 
Uthe,  Edward  E.,  Stanford  Re- 
search Inst. 

Social,  legal,  and  economic  impact 
of  weather  modification: 
Lambright,   W.  Henry,  Syra- 
cuse Research  Corp. 

Weather  hazard  mitigation: 

Auer,  August  H.,  University  of 
Wyoming. 

Veal,  Donald  L.,  National  Center 
for  Atmospheric  Research. 


An  accurate  and  inexpensive  air-  Augus 

borne  wind  measuring  system. 
An  assessment  of  synoptic  criteria  ...do. 

for  ice  multiplication  in  convective 

clouds. 

Ice  nucleation  induced  by  bacteria..  ...do. 


1976. 


Lidar  and  radiometric  data  analysis 
of  mixing  levels,  clouds,  and 
precipitation  processes. 


..do. 


The  utilization  of  weather  modifica-  September  1976. 
tion  technology:  A  State  govern- 
ment decisionmaking  study. 

The  kinematics  of  thunderstorm   August  1976  

gust  fronts  relating  to  the  mitiga- 
tion of  airport  flight  hazards. 

National  hail  research  experiment...  July  1976  


15 
12 

21 

10 

18  60, 400 

12  56, 300 


Weather  hazard  mitigation 

Research  supported  by  NSF  in  this  category  is  pointed  toward  the 
reduction  of  undesirable  aspects  of  selected  weather  hazards.  Although 
the  major  effort  has  been  in  research  on  the  reduction  of  hail  damage, 
research  related  to  other  severe  weather  phenomena  lias  included  in- 
vestigations on  lightning  protection,  wind  shear  warning,  and  fog 
hazard  alleviation.  The  major  project  in  weather  hazard  mitigation 


275 


in  recent  years  has  been  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment 
(NHRE),  which  was  initiated  by  the  Foundation  in  1971  "to  assess 
the  potential  for  altering  hail  ...  by  cloud  seeding'  and  determine  the 
extent  to  which  beneficial  modification  can  be  accomplished  effectively 
on  an  operational  basis."  42 

The  concept  of  a  national  hail  suppression  experiment  grew  out  of 
interest  by  U.S.  scientists  in  hail  suppression  activities  in  the  Soviet 
Union  in  the  1960's  and  also  from  the  1965  recommendation  of  the 
Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS)  that 
the  Foundation,  in  collaboration  with  other  Federal  agencies,  should 
develop  a  plan  for  hail  suppression  research.43  As  a  first  step  in  plan- 
ning such  a  national  effort,  the  NSF  invited  the  National  Center  for 
Atmospheric  Research  (NCAR)  to  cooperate  in  organizing  the  First 
National  Symposium  on  Hail  Suppression,  which  was  held  at  Dillon, 
Colo.,  on  October  14-15,  1965,  under  the  chairmanship  of  Verner  E. 
Suomi.44 

Arising  from  the  Dillon  conference  was  an  NSF-sponsored  Hail  Sup- 
pression Research  Steering  Committee,  also  chaired  by  Dr.  Suomi, 
which  held  a  number  of  meetings  in  the  years  immediately  following 
and  prepared  a  hail  suppression  test  outline  in  1968.45  Upon  approval 
of  the  outline  by  the  ICAS,  the  NSF  requested  that  a  detailed  plan 
for  a  national  experiment  be  developed  by  NCAR.  A  "Plan  for  the 
Northeast  Colorado  Hail  Experiment  (NECHE)"  was  prepared  by 
NCAR 46  and  approved  by  the  ICAS  in  1969.  The  NECHE  plan  called 
for  an  intensive  investigation  into  hailstorms  and  hail  suppression  to 
be  conducted  over  a  5-year  period.  After  a  few  years  of  preliminary 
investigations,  the  project  was  eventually  renamed  the  National  Hail 
Research  Experiment  (NHRE)  in  1971. 

NHRE  was  one  of  seven  proposed  national  projects  in  weather 
modification  identified  by  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  At- 
mospheric Sciences  (ICAS)  in  1971.47  The  National  Science  Founda- 
tion, which  originally  planned  the  experiment,  was  recommended  as 
the  lead  agency  for  the  project,  and  assistance  was  to  be  offered  by  the 
Departments  of  Agriculture,  Commerce,  Defense,  Interior,  and  Trans- 
portation and  by  the  Atomic  Energy  Commission  and  the  National 
Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration.48 

Although  there  was  interagency  cooperation  in  planning  the  experi- 
ment and  some  support  to  the  project  during  early  years  by  some  of 
the  aforementioned  agencies,  eventually,  most  of  the  other  agencies 
pulled  out  and  NSF  had  to  provide  full  support  on  its  own.  In  a  1974 
investigation  of  the  Federal  weather  modification  program,  the  Gen- 
eral Accounting  Office  (GAO)  concluded  that  "even  though  the  ex- 

42  Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program," 
1976.  p.  557. 

43  National  Science  Foundation.  "Renort  of  the  First  National  Symposium  on  Hail  Sup- 
pression." Dillon,  Colo.,  Oct.  14-15,  1965,  p.  1. 

44  Ibid. 

43  National  Science  Foundation.  Hail  Suppression  Research  Steering  Committee,  "Outline 
of  a  Hail  Suppression  Test."  March  1968,  p.  1. 

48  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research  and  Select  Planning  Group  of  the  Northeast 
Colorado  Hail  Experiment,  "Flan  for  the  Northeast  Colorado  Hail  Experiment,"  Boulder, 
Colo..  Mar.  17.  1969. 

47  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  "A  National  Program  for  Accelerating  Progress  in  Weather  Modification," 
ICAS  rept.  No.  15a,  June  1971,  p.  21.  (The  seven  national  projects  are  listed  in  this  report, 
p.  225. ) 

48  Ibid.,  pp.  35-37. 


276 


periment  was  well  planned,  requiring  extensive  interagency  participa- 
tion, *  *  *  for  the  most  part,  agencies  could  not  and  did  not  meet  all 
their  obligations."  49  The  GAO  study  observed  that,  because  of  the 
withdrawal  of  some  of  the  intended  support,  "important  segments  of 
research  were  lost  for  1973"  and  that  each  operational  season  would 
continue  to  have  problems  with  commitments  from  participating 
agencies.50  The  other  national  projects  recommended  by  the  ICAS, 
each  with  much  less  coordinated  planning  than  XHRE  or  with  no  such 
coordinated  planning  at  all,  failed  to  materialize  as  truly  national 
projects,  although  some  were  pursued  as  major  single-agency  projects. 

NHRE  was  based  on  the  original  NECHE  plan  prepared  for  the 
XSF  by  the  Xational  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research  (NCAR) ,  and 
management  for  conduct  of  the  experiment  was  assigned  to  NCAR 
by  NSF.  The  experiment  was  a  cooperative  effort  between  NCAR  and 
10  universities,  funded  by  NSF,  with  additional  support  from  the  De- 
partment of  Commerce  (National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admin- 
istration), the  Department  of  Transportation  (Federal  Aviation  Ad- 
ministration), and  the  Department  of  Defense.  Figure  9  is  a  map  of 
the  northeastern  corner  of  Colorado,  showing  the  two  areas  between 
Sterling,  Colo.,  and  Kimball,  Nebr.,  which  were  target  areas  for  the 
NHRE.  Field  headquarters  for  the  experiment  were  located  near 
Grover,  Colo.  Figure  10  is  a  more  detailed  NHRE  map,  showing  the 
special  use  airspace  and  the  protected  area  as  well  as  the  mesonet  and 
rawinsonde  site  locations  during  the  1974  season. 


6000 


LARAMIE  / 


5000 

KJ05 km  GROVER 
RADAR  RANGE  1 


CHEYENNE 

wyqMing 

 f  / 


NEBRASKA 


KIMBALL 

'°   SIDNEY 


COLbRAD'O 


/\!  ( 

/\  >   FT  COLLINS  [- 

\  '  O       "  ' 

\  /         I  GREELEY 


STERLING 


^BOU 


I 


LOER^W  V 


FT  MORGAN 


DENVER 
 s  


,-AKRON 


50 

I    I     I  I 


Figure  9. — Location  map,  showing  the  vicinity  of  northeastern  Colorado  where 
the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  (NHRE)  was  conducted.  NHRE  field 
headquarters  were  located  near  Grover,  Colo.  The  two  areas  outlined  between 
Sterling  and  Kimball  were  the  target  areas  for  the  seeding  program  in  1072 
southern  area)  and  in  1973  and  1974  (northern  area).  (From  Wade,  et  al.. 
1977. ) 


49  Comptroller  General  of  the  United  States.  "Need  for  a  National  Weather  Modification 
Research  Program,"  report  to  the  Congress,  U.S.  General  Accounting  Office,  B-133202, 
Auk.  23.  1074.  pp.  10-22. 

60  Ibid.,  p.  20. 


277 


s 

pecial   Use  Air 

SPACE 

rti  

 ■  «lil»iiiimn  ii 

h 

5 

mov^.e  n 

0 

5 

\  SiDN£y\  r— i                lODOEPOlE  B 

^  AREa 

\^»r»  ®  E 

- 
1 

E 

s 

»  ,j 

«  V 

C 

'k  • 

t  riiu  ! 

H                        N-AE  FOLD 
I                   *  -E.OOU.HTEAS 

E  -o 

fi   

d      o«p*.'"  * 

Vt 

| 

J*  °"  ~ 

1  ^ 

!*STE«ii«io 

1 

<r  / 

J* 

97*   NATiCKlAL  MAIL  BESfABtl.  EXPER.MEN' 
LOCATIOh  MAP 

— fi  

/ 

°  h=                                   T  ,W.  M.ES 

s — * ,M  »  y ■  *  r ... 

Figure  10. — Detailed  location  map  for  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment 
(XHRE),  showing  the  special  use  airspace  and  protected  area,  as  well  as  the 
mesonet  and  rawinsonde  site  locations  during  the  1974  summer  season.  (Cour- 
tesy of  the  National  Science  Foundation.) 

Following  collaborative  studies  of  northeast  Colorado  hailstorms 
by  NCAR,  Colorado  State  University,  and  the  U.S.  Department  of 
Commerce  during  the  period  1968-70,  what  was  to  become  the  National 
Hail  Research  Experiment  (XHRE)  effectively  began  in  the  summer 
season  of  1970  with  the  following  twofold  plan : 

1.  To  carry  out  research  into  those  processes  important  to  the  under- 
standing of  hail  production  in  severe  thunderstorms,  and 

2.  To  perform  a  randomized  test  of  a  hail  suppression  technique 
modelled  in  some  important  respects  after  the  reportedly  successful 
operation  in  the  Soviet  Union. 

The  twofold  objective  of  XHRE  has  remained  throughout  the  proj- 
ect :  however,  its  statement  has  varied  from  year  to  year  in  response  to 
changes  in  emphasis  both  at  XSF  and  at  NCAR.  In  particular,  after 
transfer  of  the  project  to  RAXX.  an  important  emphasis  was  given 
to  social,  economic,  legal,  and  environmental  studies  in  connection  with 
the  potential  impact  of  hail  suppression. 

A  preliminary  field  program,  for  instrument  testing  and  field  experi- 
ence, was  undertaken  during  the  summer  of  1971 ;  and  during  the 
summers  of  1972,  1973,  and  1974  the  major  randomized  hail  sup- 
pression test  was  conducted  along  with  other  basic  research  on  hail 


278 


properties.  Instead  of  continuing  the  randomized  seeding  experiment 
for  the  planned  5  years,  it  was  curtailed  at  the  close  of  the  1974  season 
because  research  evidence  showed  strongly  that  seeding  as  performed 
was  not  likely  to  suppress  hail  in  northeast  Colorado  and  preliminary 
analysis  indicated  that  data  from  2  more  years  was  unlikely  to  demon- 
strate a  suppression  effect.51  At  a  symposium  on  hail  and  hail  suppres- 
sion in  the  fall  of  1975,52  most  of  the  experts  agreed  that  continuation 
of  the  1972-74  randomized  seeding  experiment  was  unwise  for  the 
reasons  given  above. 

A  revised  plan  for  NHRE  followed  this  symposium,  in  which  it 
was  stated  that  future  research  should  be  directed  "*  *  *  to  combine 
applied  research,  development  of  techniques,  and  redesign  of  a  ran- 
domized seeding  experiment  in  a  manner  which  will  provide  the  great- 
est chance  of  reaching  a  conclusive  answer  as  to  the  feasibility  of  hail 
suppression  in  a  reasonable  time." 53  The  revised  plan  also  committed 
the  NHRE  staff  to  completion  of  a  report  on  the  1972-74  randomized 
seeding  experiment.  The  five-volume  report,  the  first  volume  of  which 
is  a  summary  of  the  analysis  and  results,  has  recently  been  completed 
and  distributed.54 

A  short  field  season  for  NHRE  was  undertaken  during  1975  to  test 
new  instruments  and  a  new  data  system  aboard  the  South  Dakota 
School  of  Mines  and  Technology  armored,  penetrating  T-28  aircraft. 
Operated  in  coordination  with  the  Grover  S-band  radar,  the  Grover 
control  center,  and  the  aircraft  tracking  system,  the  test  was  successful 
and  valuable  data  were  obtained.  Field  measurements  were  carried  out 
on  a  larger,  more  comprehensive  scale  during  the  summer  of  1976 ;  how- 
ever, no  seeding  was  done.55  Analyses  of  data  from  previous  years  con- 
tinued in  1976  and  1977.  Field  research  in  1976  and  succeeding  analyses 
were  intended  to  assist  in  an  improved  design  for  a  randomized  seeding 
experiment. 

Highlights  of  the  results  obtained  by  intensive  analysis  of  the  data 
obtained  from  NHRE  through  the  1975  summer  field  season  have  been 
summarized  by  Downie  and  Dirks  as  follows : 56 

1.  The  original  techniques  employed  in  NHRE  were  based  on  con- 
cepts developed  in  the  Soviet  Union,  which  hypothesized  that  rapid 
hail  growth  took  place  in  local  regions  of  liquid  water  accumulation 
zones.  A  variety  of  observations  has  led  to  the  rejection  of  the  Soviet 
model  of  hail  formulation  for  northeast  Colorado  storms. 

2.  Observations  within  the  clouds  and  examination  of  thin  sections 
of  hailstones  indicate  that  the  iee-cryst a  1  -riming  (graupel)  process  is 
dominant  rather  than  the  waterdrop-coalescence  mode  of  precipitation 
formation. 

D1  Ibid.,  pp.  3-4. 

G2  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research.  "NHRE  Symposium/Workshop  on  Hail  and 
Its  Suppression,"  Estes  Park,  Colo.,  Sept.  21-28,  1975.  National  Hail  Research  Experiment 
technical  report  NCAR/7100  75/2.  Boulder,  Colo.,  November  1975  130  pp. 

53  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  Staff,  revised  plan  for  the  National  Hail  Research 
Experiment.  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research,  Boulder,  Colo.,  February  1976,  p.  3. 

"Crow.  B.  L.,  P.  W.  Summers  A.  B,  Long,  C.  A.  Knight,  G.  B.  Foote,  and  J.  E  Dye.  final 
report — "National  Hall  Research  Experiment  :  Randomized  Seeding  Experiment:  1972-74. 
Vol.  I.  I<]xperimental  Results  and  Overall  Summary. "  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Re- 
search. Boulder,  Colo.,  December  1976.  260  pp.  [Vols.  II,  III,  IV,  and  V  deal  with  precipita- 
tion measurements,  meteorological  summary,  radar  summary,  and  hail  declaration  proce- 
dures ;ind  seeding  operations,  respectively.] 

"University  Corp.  for  Atmospheric  Recearch.  "Fiscal  Year  1978  Work  Plan  for  Analysis 

of  Data  From  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment,**  p.  3. 

^Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program," 
1976,  pp.  557-558. 


279 


3.  Much  effort  was  expended  in  the  development  of  new  instru- 
mentation during  the  NHRE  experiment  to  provide  direct  measure- 
ments of  the  characteristics  of  hail-producing  storms  which  were 
necessary  to  validate  the  concepts  of  hail  suppression. 

4.  Eesults  from  the  randomized  seeding  experiment,  which  was  car- 
ried out  during  the  period  1972-74,  do  not  permit  one  to  conclude  that 
seeding  had  any  effect  on  hail  or  rainfall.  However,  the  data  are  ex- 
tremely valuable  for  determining  the  required  density  and  extent  of 
surface  instruments  for  a  future  seeding  experiment,  as  well  as  esti- 
mating the  length  of  time  a  future  experiment  would  have  to  be  carried 
out  to  detect  a  specified  effect. 

5.  Studies  of  direct  economic  costs  and  benefits  have  provided  esti- 
mates of  the  breakeven  point  for  operational  cloud  seeding  and  reiter- 
ated the  value  of  hail  suppression  if  reductions  in  damage  of  at  least  10 
percent  are  attainable. 

Referring  to  the  randomized  seeding  experiment,  conducted  from 
1072  through  1974,  the  following  conclusion  was  made  in  the  final 
report :  At  the  outset,  the  total  mass  of  hail  at  the  ground  in  the  target 
area  was  identified  as  the  primary  response  variable  for  evaluating 
seeding  effects  on  hailfall.  The  major  conclusion  of  the  experiment  is 
that  no  statistically  significant  effect  of  seeding  is  detected.  This  result 
is  true  for  the  hail  mass  and  all  other  response  variables  considered, 
regardless  of  the  method  of  analyzing  the  data.57 

In  a  recent  paper  by  Knight,  Foote,  and  Summers  it  was  concluded 
that  "at  the  present  state  of  knowledge  of  hail  formation  in  storms,  it 
would  appear  to  be  premature  to  start  another  major  statistical  seeding 
experiment.  There  is  no  new,  very  promising  technique  in  the  offing,  as 
the  Soviet  method  appeared  to  be  when  NHRE  started."  58  The  authors 
further  state  that  scientific  research  necessary  for  a  solid  foundation 
for  new  attempts  to  modify  the  precipitation  from  convective  storms  is 
underway  and  provide  the  following  summary  of  positive  results  from 
N  HRE : 

The  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  included  a  first  attempt  at  mounting 
a  hail  suppression  test  with  a  strict  randomized  design  and  evaluation  based 
upon  physical  measurement  of  hail  rather  than  crop  damage.  The  results  have 
l»een  analyzed  in  detail,  with  extensive  evaluation  of  data  quality  and  of  opera- 
tional success,  facets  not  generally  treated  in  such  detail  in  previous  programs. 
Tlie  outcome  was  that  the  seeding  may  have  had  a  variety  of  non-zero  effects  or 
no  effects  at  all.  The  one  conclusive  result  was  to  rule  out  very  large  increases  or 
decreases  of  hail  or  rain  by  the  seeding.  The  physical  research  portion  of  NHRE 
led  to  advances  in  knowledge  of  hail  and  of  storms,  and  contributed  substantially 
to  the  development  of  the  research  tools  .  .  .  needed  to  derive  answers  to  the 
oul standing,  practical  problems.50 

Figure  11  shows  the  components  of  the  Portable  Automated  Mesonet 
(PAM)  data  network.  There  were  15  of  the  remote  PAM  stations  in 
the.  XHRE  observing  network  during  the  1976  field  season.  Each 
PAM  station  measures  pressure,  temperature,  moisture,  precipitation, 
and  wind  direction  and  speed.  Data  are  telemetered  to  a  central  collec- 
tion point,  in  real  time  if  needed,  or  they  are  stored  at  the  PAM 
station  and  collected  at  the  central  collection  point  daily. 

fi'  Crow,  et  al..  "Final  Report — National  Hail  Research  Experiment :  Randomized  Seeding 
Experiment :  1972-74."  vol.  1.  1976.  p.  iii. 

Knight.  Charles  A..  G  Brant  Foote,  and  Peter  W.  Summers,  "Physical  Research  and 
General  Conclusions  from  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment."  preprints  from  the 
"Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification."  Champaign-Urbana, 
111..  Oct.  10-13,  1977.  American  Meteorological  Society,  Boston,  Mass.,  p.  165. 

59  Ibid. 


280 


PORTABLE  AUTOMATED  MESONET  (PAM) 


STATION 


Figure  11. — Components  of  the  Portable  Automated  Mesonet  (PAM)  data  col- 
lection system,  used  in  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  (NHRE).  Each 
PAM  station  measures  pressure,  temperature,  moisture,  and  wind  speed  and 
direction;  data  are  then  telemetered  to  a  central  collection  point.  (Courtesy 
of  the  National  Science  Foundation.) 


A  typical  remote  field  installation  of  the  portable  automated  mesonet  (PAM) 
system.  (Courtesy  of  the  National  Science  Foundation.) 


282 


Weather  modification  technology  development 

Research  sponsored  by  the  NSF  under  this  category  is  intended 
to  utilize  predictive  models,  advanced  measurement  systems,  and 
statistical  analyses  to  improve  the  experimental  design  and  evaluation 
of  weather  modification  investigations.  Part  of  the  demand  for  some 
of  the  long,  costly  weather  modification  experiments  is  due  to  the 
large  natural  variability  of  atmospheric  processes,  which  is  a  major 
obstacle  to  successful  field  tests  of  weather  modification  technology. 
It  is  expected  that  improvements  achieved  through  the  high  priority 
research  incorporating  the  combined  use  of  the  three  research  tools 
listed  above  will  not  only  aid  in  the  logistic  design  of  experiments, 
but  will  also  reduce  the  predicted  natural  variability  of  weather 
events,  thus  reducing  the  overall  time  required  for  conducting  a  de- 
finitive experiment.60 

The  NSF-supported  Climax  experiments  (conducted  by  Colorado 
State  University  from  1960  to  1970)  first  demonstrated  the  efficacy 
of  wintertime  orographic  precipitation  enhancement.  Results  of  these 
experiments  have  provided  the  basis  for  a  number  of  subsequent  dem- 
onstration experiments.61  The  following  examples  of  weather  modifi- 
cation technology  development  projects  have  received  NSF  research 
support  in  recent  years : 62 

1.  Evaluation  of  the  Florida  area  cumulus  experiment  (FACE), 
where  cloud  motion  has  been  found  to  be  a  significant  covariate  in  the 
data  evaluation. 

2.  Development  of  new  techniques  for  the  evaluation  of  convective 
precipitation  in  the  metropolitan  meteorological  experiment  (Metro- 
mex). 

3.  Development  and  testing  of  statistical- physical  methods  for  the 
evaluation  of  operational  cloud-seeding  programs. 

4.  Research  on  various  ice  nucleants  which  might  be  used  instead  of 
silver  iodide  and  on  development  of  delivery  systems  for  organic 
nucleants. 

5.  Assessment  of  Midwest  cloud  characteristics  for  weather  modifi- 
cation, by  compiling  and  analyzing  sample  statistics  of  variables  im- 
portant in  cloud  development  and  precipitation  processes  as  well  as  in 
their  modification  as  a  function  of  mesoscale  and  macroscale  atmos- 
peric  conditions. 

6.  Exploration  of  the  feasibility  of  artificially  generating  cirrus 
clouds  as  a  weather  modification  tool  and  numerical  modeling  of  ef- 
fects of  cirrus  clouds  on  the  troposphere  and  mesoscale  weather. 

7.  Maintenance  and  operation  of  a  testing  and  calibration  facility  for 
seeding  materials,  cloud-seeding  generators,  and  ice  nucleus  measur- 
ing instrumentation,  for  use  by  research  projects  of  Federal  agencies 
and  by  the  commercial  cloud-seeding  industry  (at  Colorado  State 
University). 

Other  specific  research  projects  designed  to  improve  the  technology 
of  weather  modification  are  found  in  the  list  of  recent  RANN  awards 
for  weather  modification  research  in  table  14.  In  the  past,  the  NSF 
program  in  weather  modification  has  made  significant  contributions  to 

80  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77,  p.  96. 

81  The  Climax  experiments  are  discussed  under  orographic  precipitation  enhancement  tech- 
nology, in  ch.      p.  77. 

62  Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program,"  1976. 
p.  560  ;  and  Currie  S.  Downie,  personal  communication. 


283 


the  initial  phases  of  major  weather  modification  projects  of  other  Fed- 
eral agencies,  such  as  Project  Stormfury  (Department  of  Commerce) 
and  Project  Skyfire  (Department  of  Agriculture) . 


Instrumented  aircraft,  operated  by  the  Research  Aviation  Facility  of  the  National 
Center  for  Atmospheric  Research  (NCAR),  whose  primary  mission  in  the  1976 
summer  field  season  of  the  National  Hail  Research  Experiment  (NHRE),  was 
to  assess  the  feasibility  of  on-top  cloud  seeding.  (Courtesy  of  the  National 
Science  Foundation.) 

Inadvertent  weather  modification 

The  objective  of  this  portion  of  the  NSF/RANN  weather  modifica- 
tion research  program  is  "to  delineate  the  mechanisms  whereby,  and 
the  extent  to  which,  an  agricultural  region  modifies  its  own  climate 
and  an  urban  area  modifies  its  surrounding  weather,  precipitation,  and 
aerosol."  63  Most  of  the  NSF  research  on  inadvertent  weather  modifi- 
cation is  concentrated  in  the  metropolitan  meteorological  experiment 
(METROMEX)  in  the  neighborhood  of  St.  Louis.  The  research  seeks 
to  provide  better  definition  of  the  causes  for  anomalies  in  precipitation 
and  other  atmospheric  properties  observed  as  a  result  of  the  urban  in- 
fluence. In  addition  to  METROMEX  other  inadvertent  weather  modi- 
fication research  in  which  NSF  has  interest  includes  studies  on  the  ef- 
fees  of  energy  development,  expanded  agricultural  production,  and 
growing  urban  sprawl.64 

One  current  NSF-sponsored  project  is  being  conducted  by  the  Uni- 
versity of  Washington  on  inadvertent  effects  induced  by  coal-fired 
electric  powerplants.  The  objective  of  this  research  is  to  determine 

63  National  Science  Foundation,  "Summary  of  Awards  :  1976,"  Division  of  Advanced  En- 
vironmental Research  and  Technology,  Washington,  D.C.  (no  publication  date),  NSF-RA- 
760219,  p.  97. 

64  Federal  Council  on  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  on  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77,  pp.  96-97. 


284 


the  effects  on  visibility,  clouds,  and  precipitation  of  the  effluents  from 
modern  coal  powerplants.  Such  effects  may  be  considerable  since  the 
plants  emit  much  heat,  moisture,  particulates,  and  gaseous  material 
into  the  atmosphere.  Results  from  the  project  are  expected  to  aid  in 
evaluation  of  environmental  effects  of  these  generators  and  to  assist  in 
the  siting  of  new  powerplants.  Principal  users  of  the  results  include 
regional,  State,  and  Federal  agencies  concerned  with  energy  develop- 
ment, research,  ecology,  and  land  development,  as  well  as  engineering 
firms  involved  with  air  pollution  impact  studies  and  control  systems.65 

The  subject  of  another  inadvertent  weather  modification  study  is 
the  influence  on  the  climates  of  the  Great  Plains  by  widespread  irriga- 
tion. The  main  objective  of  this  research  is  to  determine  the  effects  on 
precipitation;  also  of  concern  are  influences  on  other  meteorological 
parameters.  Results  show  the  existence  of  rainfall  anomalies  over  an 
area  comparable  in  size  to  the  irrigated  area,  and  the  effects  are  most 
detectable  during  wet  summer  months.66 

METROMEX  is  a  multi-institutional,  multiyear  research  project 
sponsored  by  the  NSF  and  several  other  Government  agencies,  at- 
tempting to  discover  causes  for,  and  to  assess  consequences  of,  urban- 
ind'uced  eather  effects  at  St.  Louis  and  vicinity.  Primary  goals  of 
METROMEX  are  the  systematic  investigation  of : 67 

The  effects  of  a  large  urban  complex  on  the  frequency,  amount, 
intensity,  and  duration  of  clouds,  precipitation,  and  related  severe 
weather;  and 

The  conditions  whereby  the  urban  complex  modifies  the  precip- 
itation process. 

Application  related  goals  of  the  experiment  are  investigation  and 
activities : 68 

To  study  and  develop  techniques  for  translating  the  results  of 
the  scientific  goals  to  other  urban  areas  so  as  to  predict  the  urban- 
related  changes  in  other  cities ; 

To  translate  relevant  results  to  a  wide  variety  of  users  in  the 
scientific,  government,  and  business  communities ; 

To  provide  the  basis  for  studies  of  the  potential  changes  in  cli- 
mate relating  to  megalopolis  and  to  major  land  use  changes. 
A  wide  variety  of  potential  users  of  the  information  from  METRO- 
MEX include  urban  and  regional  planners,  meteorologists,  hydrol- 
ogists,  airport  planners  and  operators,  and  air  quality  scientists.  The 
study  is  relevant  to  impacts  of  increased  use  of  coal,  large  concentra- 
tions of  electrical  energy  generators  in  power  parks,  and  long  range 
consequences  of  air  pollution  on  climate.69 

METROMEX  is  the  world's  first  major  field  program  planned  to 
link  urban  land  use  with  modification  of  the  surrounding  weather.  The 
selection  of  St.  Louis  as  the  site  for  the  experiments  was  based  on  the 
relatively  simple  topography  of  the  city  and  its  surroundings,  the 
existence  of  farmlands  downwind  to  the  east  in  the  "shadow"  of  the 


85  National  Science  Foundation.  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology, "Summary  of  Awards  :  1976,"  p.  99. 

w  Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program,"  1976. 
p.  559 . 

m  "Principal  Investigators  of  Project  Metromex.  Metromex  Update."  Bulletin  of  the 
American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  57,  No.  3,  Mar.  1976,  p.  304. 
"  Ibid. 

»  Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program,"  1976. 
p.  559. 


285 


city  on  which  urban  influences  can  be  studied,  the  relatively  unclut- 
tered airspace  above  the  city  which  permitted  research  flights  and 
atmospheric  experiments,  and  the  patterns  of  urbanization  which  are 
typical  of  other  areas  in  midlatitude  North  America.70 

Most  of  the  METROMEX  field  activities  were  conducted  during  the 
summer  months  in  a  2,000-square-mile  area  about  56  miles  in  diameter 
which  includes  St.  Louis  and  the  Alton-Wood  River  industrialized  area 
to  the  northeast.  A  larger  3,800-square-mile  area  which  includes  St. 
Louis  and  extends  downward  contained  the  world's  largest  rain-gage 
network.71  These  two  areas  are  shown  in  figure  12. 

O    STANDARD  WEATHER  OBSERVATION  SITE 


Figure  12. — METROMEX  field  experiment  area,  centered  in  St.  Louis,  and  ex- 
tended "downwind"  area  containing  network  of  rain  gages  and  other  instru- 
mentation. (From  Changnon  ad  Simonin.  Studies  of  selected  precipitation 
cases  from  METROMEX.  Illinois  State  Water  Survey,  Urbana,  1975.) 

70 National  Science  Foundation,  "Do  Cities  Change  the  Weather?"  Mosaic,  vol.  5,  No.  3, 
summer  1974,  p.  30. 
1 1bid. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  21 


286 


Within  the  research  and  data  collection  areas,  measurements  have 
been  made  of  the  speeds  and  direction  of  winds  at  different  heights  and 
locations,  of  temperatures,  cloud  dynamics,  precipitation,  the  nature 
and  intensity  of  pollutants,  number  and  sizes  of  storms,  and  the  quality 
and  quantity  of  ground  water  under  different  weather  conditions.72 

Planning  for  METKOMEX  was  initiated  in  1969-70  by  scientists 
from  the  Illinois  State  Water  Survey,  the  University  of  Chicago,  the 
University  of  Wyoming,  and  Argonne  National  Laboratory.  The  ex- 
perimental field  program  was  launched  in  1971,  supported  in  part  by 
the  Atomic  Energy  Commission,  the  Department  of  Health,  Educa- 
tion, and  Welfare,  and  the  State  of  Illinois,  as  well  as  the  National  Sci- 
ence Foundation.  Other  research  groups  which  later  participated  in  the 
project  include  Stanford  Research  Institute,  Battelle  Pacific  North- 
west Laboratories,  the  University  of  Missouri,  Sierra  Nevada  Corp., 
and  the  University  of  California  at  San  Diego.73  Field  measurements 
in  METROMEX  were  essentially  completed  during  1976;  although 
the  final  METROMEX  project  report  is  expected  to  be  published  in 
the  near  future,  the  analysis  of  the  large  amount  of  collected  data 
should  continue  for  some  years. 

In  a  1976  review  of  project  accomplishments,  the  following  findings 
from  METROMEX  were  summarized : 74 

1.  There  is  a  summer  precipitation  anomaly  at  St.  Louis,  varying 
between  a  10  and  30  percent  excess  above  background,  the  location 
and  intensity  of  which  vary  with  the  prevailing  seasonal  storm  motions 
and  general  character  of  summer  weather. 

2.  Some  individual  rain  intensity  centers  of  showers  or  thunder- 
storms that  develop  or  pass  over  St.  Louis  and  over  the  Alton-Wood 
River  industrial  area  appear  to  be  enhanced  significantly  (94  and  73 
percent,  respectively) . 

3.  The  major  precipitation  changes  in  and  east  of  the  urban  indus- 
trial area  seem  to  occur  during  squall  line  or  squall  zone  conditions 
when  nature  is  capable  of  producing  moderate  to  heavy  rains,  result- 
ing in  a  60  percent  or  greater  increase  in  heavy  rain  (greater  than  or 
equal  to  3  cm.)  days,  a  25  percent  increase  in  thunderstorm  activity, 
and  an  80  percent  increase  in  hailstorms  and  hail  intensities  in  and 
just  east  of  the  city.  Radar  shows  a  region  of  maximum  development 
of  large  thunderstorms  extending  to  100  kilometers  northeast  from 
the  city. 

4.  Like  most  large  cities,  St.  Louis  has  a  marked  heat  island  and  an 
identifiable  minimum  in  specific  humidity.  These  effects  are  most 
marked  at  the  surface,  but  often  show  height-averaged  temperature 
excesses  of  1  degree  K  and  moisture  deficits  of  1  gram  of  water  vapor 
per  kilogram  of  air,  relative  to  nearby  rural  areas,  extending  through 
the  mixing  layer  to  cloud  bases. 

5.  The  low-level  air  flow  under  light  wind  conditions  is  markedly 
perturbed  by  the  city  and  often  results  in  distinct  convergence  over 
and  just  downwind  of  the  city  center. 

6.  The  pattern  of  production  of  Aitken  condensation  nuclei  (ACN) 
and  cloud  condensation  nuclei  (CCN)  has  been  developed  for  the 
area.  Elemental  emission  rates  have  been  measured. 

"  Ibid. 

73  Principal  investigators  of  Project  Metromex.  Metromex  update,  1976,  p.  304. 
71  Ibid.,  pp.  304-305. 


287 


7.  Convective  storms  in  the  St.  Louis  area  are  significant  mechanisms 
for  removal  and  deposition  of  urban  pollutants. 

Mechanisms  which,  in  varying  degrees,  may  be  responsible  for  ob- 
served downwind  increases  in  summer  precipitation,  heavy  rain  occur- 
rences, and  hail  activity  include  the  large  quantities  of  particulate 
and  gaseous  matter  injected  by  industries  and  motor  vehicles  into  the 
atmosphere,  the  heat  added  and  heat  island  effects  of  the  urban  area, 
the  anomalous  moisture  patterns  over  the  city,  and  the  increased 
turbulence  and  wind  perturbation  caused  by  the  roughness  of  the 
city's  surface  and  the  heat  island.75  It  has  further  been  observed  that 
the  10  to  30  percent  increase  in  summer  rainfall  over  the  2,000-square- 
mile  area  east  of  St.  Louis  produces  a  15-percent  average  increase  in 
streamflow  and  increased  infiltration  of  ground  water.76 

Societal  utilization  activities 

The  purposes  of  this  portion  of  the  NSF/RANN"  program,  con- 
cerned with  social,  legal,  environmental,  and  economic  impacts  of 
weather  modification,  are  "to  evaluate  societal  reaction  to  weather 
modification,  to  determine  societal  expectations,  and  to  identify  the 
needs  for  the  scientific  base  necessary  to  bring  about  successful  appli- 
cation of  weather  modification."  This  research  "extends  across  the 
disciplines  of  political,  social,  legal,  economic,  ecological,  and  physi- 
cal sciences  in  an  effort  to  investigate  the  impact  of  weather  modifi- 
cation technology  on  man."  77  A  number  of  studies  have  been  sup- 
ported by  the  Foundation  in  this  category,  in  which  these  aspects  of 
weather  modification  are  examined. 

A  study  group  on  the  societal  consequences  of  weather  modification 
was  formed  in  1973  at  the  request  of  the  Interdepartmental  Commit- 
tee for  Atmospheric  Sciences  (ICAS).  This  study,  sponsored  by  the 
NSF,  was  designed  to  examine  needs  of  the  Nation  for  a  weather  modi- 
fication capability  and  to  determine  if  the  present  Federal  weather 
modification  program  is  directed  toward  meeting  those  needs.  Results 
of  this  investigation,  now  nearing  completion,  should  be  useful  in 
identifying  the  alterations  or  redirections  of  the  Federal  program 
required  to  meet  societal  goals.78 

Studies  in  social,  legal,  economic,  and  ecological  aspects  of  weather 
modification  that  are  currently  underway  or  have  recently  been  com- 
pleted include  the  following : 

1.  Preparation  of  a  compendium  on  economic  impacts  of  weather 
variability,  by  the  University  of  Missouri.  This  report  was  designed 
to  present  quantified  relations  between  weather  and  certain  basic 
human  activities,  such  as  agriculture  and  energy  use.79 

2.  A  comparative  analysis  of  public  response  to  weather  modifica- 
tion, by  Human  Ecology  Research  Services,  Inc.  Building  on  results 
of  6  years  of  sociological  study  of  public  response  to  weather  modifi- 
cation, this  research  will  examine  social  response  to  weather  modifica- 
tion in  South  Dakota  and  test  preliminary  hypotheses  on  acceptance 
and  rejection  processes.  Validation  of  the  preliminary  hypotheses  and 

75Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program," 
1976.  p  559. 
7«  Ibid. 

77  National  Science  Foundation.  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology, "Summary  of  Awards  :  1976,"  p.  101. 

78  Downie  and  Dirks,  "National  Science  Foundation  Weather  Modification  Program,"  1976, 
p.  560. 

79  Ibid. 


288 


response,  patterns  will  provide  the  framework  for  development  of  a 
causal  model  of  the  acceptance/rejection  process.80 

3.  Field  experiment  to  test  a  hypothesis  of  the  reality,  characteris- 
tic, and  magnitude  of  extended  area  effects  from  weather  modification, 
by  Colorado  State  University.  With  increasing  evidence  that  planned 
weather  modification  projects  may  have  effects  that  extend  over  broad 
geographic  areas,  this  research  is  an  investigation  of  "downwind'' 
effects  of  past  experiments  in  the  Rocky  Mountains  and  the  Great 
Plains  of  the  United  States  and  in  Israel,  extending  an  earlier  3-year 
study  of  such  effects.  Physical  and  statistical  analyses  are  combined 
to  determine  such  extended  area  effects  and  to  develop  hypotheses  de- 
scribing processes  which  produce  the  effects.  The  project  also  includes 
design  of  a  field  experiment  based  on  results  of  these  post  hoc  analyses 
and  on  current  results  from  modeling  studies  and  physical  experi- 
ments. This  research  is  intended  to  provide  a  basis  for  evaluating 
extended-area  effects  on  societal  activities  and  should  be  valuable  in 
formulation  of  policies  on  public  issues  in  weather  modification.81 

4.  Management  of  nucleating  agents  used  in  weather  modification 
and  development  of  microbial  threshold  toxicity  criteria,  by  Colorado 
State  University.  The  purpose  of  this  research  is  to  provide  informa- 
tion on  possible  long-term  effects  of  weather  modification  nucleating 
agents  on  microbial  ecosystems,  concentrating  on  soil  and  aquatic  eco- 
systems, which  are  the  most  critical  areas  for  accumulation  of  the 
agents.  Results  of  this  study  will  be  used  to  prepare  environmental 
impact  statements  for  silver  iodide  seeding  in  various  experimental 
and  operational  cloud  seeding  programs.82  In  the  final  phase  of  this 
study,  a  workshop  on  the  environmental  impacts  of  cloud  seeding 
materials  was  conducted  in  Vail,  Colo.,  in  November  1976.  The  pro- 
ceedings of  the  workshop  are  expected  to  be  published  during  1978. 

5.  Utilization  of  weather  modification  technology :  A  State  govern- 
ment decisionmaking  study,  by  Syracuse  University.  State  govern- 
ments have  taken  the  lead  in  developing  regulatory  policies  affecting 
the  present  use  of  weather  modification  technology:  however,  such 
policies  cover  a  wide  spectrum,  some  being  highly  restrictive  while 
others  are  more  permissive.  This  study,  focusing  on  decisionmaking 
processes  in  five  States — South  Dakota.  Colorado,  Illinois,  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  California — will  develop  case  histories  and  analyses  of 
policymaking,  the  availability  of  which  should  help  Federal  and  State 
officials  in  making  decisions  on  emerging  weather  modification 
technology.83 

Agricultural  iceather  modification 

This  relatively  new  portion  of  the  NSF/RANN  weather  modifica- 
tion program  is*  evolving  in  response  to  a  need  "to  develop  a  better 
understanding  of  weather  variability  and  its  significance  to  food  pro- 
duction and  to  develop  specific  applications  of  weather  modification 
technology  as  it  relates  to  agricultural  needs.84  For  such  applications, 
weather  modification  is  considered  in  a  broad  context,  including  all 
identifiable  modifications  of  the  atmospheric  environment. 

»  National  Science  Foundation.  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nologv,  "Summary  of  Awards  :  1976,"  p.  101. 
81  Ibid.,  p.  102. 

w  National  Science  Foundation.  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology. "Summary  of  Awards:  Transition  Quarter  1976."  NSF  77-8.  Washington,  D.C. 
(no  publication  date) , j).  48.  _  .  ,  _  .       .  ,-__«, 

«•  National  Science  Foundation.  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology, "Summary  of  Awards  :  1976,"  p.  105. 


289 


A  major  study,  which  included  an  assessment  of  the  potential  of 
weather  modification  in  support  of  agriculture,  was  recently  com- 
pleted by  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences  (NAS) /National  Re- 
search Council.  The  investigation  dealt  with  changing  weather  and 
climate  patterns  and  their  effects  on  agricultural  and  renewable  re- 
sources productivity.85  These  implications  were  examined  by  the  com- 
mittee in  climate  and  weather  fluctuations  and  agricultural  produc- 
tion, which  was  established  by  the  NAS  in  June  of  1975  at  the  request 
and  with  the  support  of  the  National  Science  Foundation.  Among 
other  considerations,  a  chapter  of  the  committee's  report  was  devoted 
to  weather  modification,  covering  such  topics  as  the  feasibility  of 
weather  modification,  crop-weather  relationship  and  weather  modifi- 
cation, impact  variability,  and  societal  and  environmental  issues.  The 
committee  made  the  following  recommendations : 86 

Intensive  efforts  should  be  made  to  apply  existing  basic  knowl- 
edge of  atmospheric  and  cloud  processes  in  specific  applied  re- 
search programs  to  benefit  agriculture.  Methods  of  applying  the 
benefits  of  demonstrated  or  nearly  demonstrated  weather  modi- 
fication techniques  to  specific  crop  needs,  incorporating  water 
storage,  and  other  water  management  procedures,  should  be  devel- 
oped. Proper  recognition  of  societal  concerns  must  be  included. 

Gaps  in  basic  knowledge  of  agriculturally  oriented  weather 
modification  should  be  identified,  and  research  initiated  to  fill 
them.  Results  of  this  research  should  be  applied  on  an  interactive 
basis  with  ongoing  research  and  application  projects.  Important 
segments  of  the  basic  research  should  address  the  exploration  of 
new  ideas  and  approaches. 

Government  organizational  structures  and  policies  should  in- 
sure an  integrated  approach  to  weather  modification  research  so 
that  related  problems  such  as  rain  and  hail  from  convective  sys- 
tems can  be  treated  in  the  same  experimental  framework.  Research 
programs  should  be  interdisciplinary,  should  draw  on  the  expertise 
available  from  Government  agencies  and  from  the  academic  and 
private  sectors,  and  should  incorporate  a  productive  mix  of  big 
science — permitting  large,  pooled  facilities — and  small  science — 
encouraging  small  group  initiatives.  The  growing  collaboration 
between  scientifically  and  operationally  oriented  weather  modi- 
fication experts  should  be  focused  on  key  crops  and  agricultural 
regions. 

Two  other  recent  NSF-sponsored  research  projects  on  weather  modi- 
fication in  support  of  agriculture  are: 

1.  An  assessment  of  the  present  and  potential  role  of  weather  modi- 
fication in  agricultural  production,  conducted  by  Colorado  State  Uni- 
versity. This  research  was  intended  to  identify  potential  capabilities  of 
weather  modification  in  terms  of  agricultural  productivity  and  to 
focus  priorites  for  weather  modification  research  in  terms  of  maximum 
benefits  to  agriculture.  The  research  plan  included  a  workshop  of  ex- 
perts in  agriculture  and  weather  modification  in  order  to  develop  an 
authoritative  document  on  the  role  of  weather  modification  in  increas- 
ing world  agricultural  production.87 

83  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Research  Council,  "Climate  and  Food  ;  Climate 
Fluctuation  and  U.S.  Agricultural  Production."  a  report  of  the  Committee  on  Climate  and 
Weather  Fluctuations  and  Agricultural  Production,  ISBN  0-309-02522-2,  Washington, 
D.C.,  1976.  212  pp. 

86  Ibid.,  p.  131. 

87  National  Science  Foundation.  Division  of  Advanced  Environmental  Research  and  Tech- 
nology, "Summary  of  Awards  :  1976,"  p.  105. 


290 


2.  Assessment  of  weather  modification  in  alleviating  agricultural 
water  shortages  during  drought,  conducted  by  the  Illinois  State  water 
survey.  The  purpose  of  this  study  was  to  provide  information  needed 
in  decisionmaking  processes  regarding  use  of  weather  modification  for 
mitigation  of  agricultural  droughts  in  the  Midwest  and  other  similar 
areas.  This  research  was  intended  to  contribute  to  man's  knowledge  of 
the  limitaitons  of  weather  modification  to  planned  precipitation  aug- 
mentation for  agricultural  applications  and  to  assist  in  determining  the 
scope  and  duration  of  future  weather  modification  research  in  similar 
climatic  regions  of  the  world.88 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE 

Introduction  and  general  discussion 

Within  the  Department  of  Commerce  the  research  program  in 
weather  modification  is  conducted  by  the  Environmental  Research 
Laboratories  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
(NOAA).  Through  NOAA's  predecessor  organizations,  the  U.S. 
Weather  Bureau  and  the  Environmental  Science  Services  Administra- 
tion (ESSA),  the  Commerce  Department  has  been  active  in  weather 
modification  since  1946,  with  research  programs  directed  at  modifying 
severe  storms  such  as  hurricanes,  increasing  rainfall  from  tropical 
cloud  systems,  and  suppressing  lightning  in  thunderstorms.  The  two 
major  ongoing  research  projects  are  the  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Ex- 
periment (FACE) ,  a  project  to  demonstrate  the  possibility  of  increas- 
ing precipitation  from  convective  cloud  systems  through  dynamic  seed- 
ing, and  Project  Stormfury,  intended  to  mitigate  the  severe  impacts  of 
hurricanes. 

The  NOAA  Research  Facilities  Center  (RFC) ,  is  an  operational  and 
technical  organization,  with  the  mission  of  providing  instrumented  air- 
craft for  research  programs  of  NOAA  and  other  Government  agencies, 
including  weather  modification  projects.  Part  of  NOAA's  overall 
weather  modification  effort  is  its  program  of  Global  Monitoring  for 
Climatic  Change  (GMCC),  under  which  measurements  are  made  of 
natural  and  manmade  atmospheric  trace  constituents  in  order  to  deter- 
mine their  increases  or  decreases  and  possible  influences  on  climatic 
change.  Other  research  in  recent  years  has  been  concerned  with  modi- 
fication of  extratropical  severe  storms  and  in  suppression  of  lightning, 
the  latter  in  cooperation  with  the  National  Aeronautics  and  Space  Ad- 
ministration (NASA)  in  connection  with  protection  of  launch  vehicles. 

In  addition  to  these  activities  intended  to  explore  weather  modifica- 
tion and  develop  techniques  for  controlling  the  weather,  NOAA  also 
conducts  background  research  in  a  variety  of  areas  of  atmospheric  sci- 
ence that  is  essential  to  the  future  of  weather  modification  development. 
Included  are  modeling  and  theoretical  work  on  the  structure,  dynamics, 
and  energy  processes  of  severe  storms  such  as  hurricanes,  tornadoes, 
and  thunderstorms.  Also  pertinent  is  the  development  of  instrumenta- 
tion for  direct  measurement  of  atmospheric  properties  and  for  remote 
probing  of  the  atmosphere.89 

A  summary  of  the  funding  for  the  NOAA  weather  modification 
program  for  fiscal  year  1976  through  fiscal  year  1978  (estimated)  is 
contained  in  table  15. 

88  Ibid.,  pp.  105-106. 

wTownsend,  John  W.,  testimony  In  :  U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives,  Committee 
on  Science  and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  "Weath- 
er Modification,"  hearings.  94th  Congress,  2d  session,  June  15-18,  1977,  Washington,  D.C, 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1976,  p.  171. 


291 


TABLE  15. — WEATHER  MODIFICATION  FUNDING  FOR  FISCAL  YEAR  1976  THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1978  FOR  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE,  NATIONAL  OCEANIC  AND  ATMOSPHERIC  ADMINISTRATION* 

[In  thousands  of  dollars] 


Fiscal  year— 

1976 

1977 

1977 

1978 

870 

180 

735 

810 

Modification  of  convective  clouds   

Research  facilities  center  (prorated)   

755 
1,589 

171 
281 
0 

757 
1, 176 
0 

893 
1, 000 
0 

Subtotal  

4,304 

632 

2, 668 

2,703 

Global  monitoring  for  climatic  change: 

Air  quality  analysis  

1,717 
313 

438 
76 

1, 563 
346 

2, 138 
160 

Subtotal   

2,030 

514 

1,909 

2, 298 

6, 334 

1, 146 

4,  577 

5,001 

>  From  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program:  Fiscal  Year  1978.  ICAS  21-FY  78.  August  1977,  p.  89. 


NOAA  1  X-band  Doppler  radar  operated  by  the  Wave  Propagation  Laboratory 
of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.  (Courtesy  of  the 
U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.) 

The  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment  {FACE) 

The  FACE  program  is  conducted  by  the  cumulus  group  of  NO AA's 
National  Hurricane  and  Experimental  Meteorology  Laboratory 


292 


(NHEML)  and  is  an  outgrowth  of  a  series  of  experiments  in  which 
individual  clouds  were  seeded  in  Florida.  These  experiments  demon- 
strated that  dynamic  seeding 90  is  effective  in  increasing  the  sizes  and 
lifetimes  of  individual  cumulus  clouds  and  the  rainfall  resulting  from 
them.  FACE  is  designed  to  determine  whether  dynamic  seeding  can 
be  used  to  augment  convective  precipitation  over  a  large  area  in  south 
Florida  by  promoting  the  development  of  larger,  better  organized 
convective  systems.  Cloud  merger,  the  joining  of  two  formerly  inde- 
pendent cloud  entities,  appears  to  be  the  important  natural  process 
leading  to  heavy  and  extensive  rainfall  in  Florida.91 

The  design  of  FACE  was  intended  to  investigate  two  sequential 
questions.  The  first  question  was  whether  dynamic  seeding  can  be  used 
systematically  to  induce  cloud  merger  and  increase  rainfall  from  the 
groups  of  subject  clouds,  and  the  second  was  to  determine  whether 
dynamic  seeding  can  be  used  to  produce  a  net  increase  in  rainfall 
over  a  fixed  target  area.  An  affirmative  answer  to  the  first  question, 
while  necessary,  may  not  be  a  sufficient  condition  to  verify  the  second.92 
FACE  has  been  an  exploratory  experiment  intended  to  answer  these 
questions;  hence,  its  design  has  been  evolutionary.  It  cannot,  there- 
fore, be  regarded  as  a  conclusive  experiment,  in  spite  of  strong  indica- 
tions of  a  positive  seeding  effect,  it  must  be  replicated  with 
a  predetermined  design  to  confirm  results  achieved  to  date.  It  is 
planned  that  such  a  confirmatory  FACE  effort  will  begin  in  Florida 
during  the  summer  of  1978.93 

The  experimental  design  for  FACE  is  a  random  design,  where  the 
days  over  a  single  target  are  randomized  into  seeded  and  nonseeded 
days,  with  nonseeded  days  as  the  control.  Experiments  began  on  a 
limited  basis  in  1970  and  were  continued  in  1971, 1973, 1975,  and  1976. 
Design  features  included : 94 

1.  A  fixed  target  area  with  the  experiments  randomized  by  day. 

2.  Surveillance  of  the  clouds  in  the  target  by  10-centimeter  radars, 
with  radar  estimation  of  the  rainfall  (rain  estimates  were  adjusted 
using  rain  gages) . 

3.  Determination  of  suitable  experimentation  days  on  the  basis  of 
a  daily  suitability  criterion,  based  on  predicted  cloud  heights  for 
seeded  and  nonseeded  conditions,  using  a  one-dimensional  cloud  model. 
A  factor  was  also  introduced  to  bias  the  decision  for  suitability  against 
natural  rainy  days. 

4.  Flights  by  seeder  aircraft  on  days  that  satisfy  the  suitability 
criterion.  The  decision  to  seed  was  randomly  determined  in  the  air, 
with  only  the  randomizer  knowing  the  decision.  Suitable  convective 
clouds  were  seeded  near  their  tops. 

5.  Final  acceptance  of  a  day  for  inclusion  in  the  analysis  only  if  60 
flares  were  ejected  or  six  clouds  were  seeded,  or  both. 


90  For  a  discussion  of  dynamic  seeding  of  cumulus  clouds  see  ch.  3,  p.  68. 

91  Woodley,  William  L.,  Joanne  Simpson,  Ronald  Biondini,  and  Joyce  Berkeley,  "Rainfall 
Results,  1970-75  :  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment,"  Science,  vol.  195,  No.  4280,  Feb.  25, 
1977.  p.  735. 

92  Ibid. 

93  Woodlev,  William  L.,  J.  A.  Jordan,  Joanne  Simpson,  Ronald  Biondini,  and  Jobn  A. 
Flueck.  "XOAA's  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment.  Rainfall  Results;  1970-76"  (Sub- 
mitted for  publication  to  the  Journal  of  Applied  Meteorology.)  1978. 

9*  Woodlev.  Simpson.  Biondini,  and  Berkeley,  "Rainfall  Results,  1970-75  :  Florida  Area 
Cumulus  Experiment,"  1977,  pp.  735-736. 


293 


In  the  analysis  of  the  FACE  experimental  days,  floating  target 
and  total  target  calculations  were  made  for  the  6  hours  following 
the  initial  seeding.  The  floating  target  is  composed  of  the  radar  echoes 
of  all  experimental  clouds  and  those  with  which  they  merge.  The 
total  target  is  made  up  of  the  floating  target  echoes  plus  the  echoes  of 
nonexperimental  clouds.95 

Figure  13  is  a  map  of  the  field  design  for  FACE,  showing  the 


Figure  13.— Field  design  for  the  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment  (FACE). 
The  largest  quadrilateral  is  total  target  area,  within  which  are  areas  covered 
by  the  dual  Doppler  radars,  the  mesonet  intensive  network  and  the  clusters  of 
rainguages.  (From  Woodley  and  Sax,  NOAA  Technical  Report  ERL  354-WMPO 
6,  January  1976.) 

85  Woodley,  William  L.  and  Robert  I.  Sax,  "The  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment :  Ra- 
Pe?Jg«?'  Procedures,  Results,  and  Future  Course,"  NOAA  technical  report  ERL  354- 
WMPO  6.  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administra- 
tion, Environmental  Research  Laboratories,  Boulder,  Colo.,  January  1976  p  xiv 


294 


13,000  km2  target  area  and  several  smaller  areas  of  radar  and 
rain  gage  coverage,  as  configured  in  the  period  1972-73.  Although 
the  basic  target  area  remained  the  same,  the  networks  of  intensive 
coverage  by  radar  and  rain  gages  were  modified  somewhat  in  later 
years. 

Data  from  75  experimental  days  have  been  accrued  in  FACE  since 
1970 ;  these  have  represented  39  seed  days  and  36  control  days.  Analyses 
have  shown  that  dynamic  seeding  under  appropriate  atmospheric  con- 
ditions is  effective  in  increasing  the  growth  and  rain  production  of  in- 
dividual cumulus  clouds,  in  inducing  cloud  merger,  and  in  producing 
increases  in  rainfall  from  groups  of  convective  clouds  as  they  pass 
through  the  target  area.  When  rainfall  over  the  total  target  area  (i.e., 
that  from  the  floating  target  plus  that  from  nonexperimental  clouds 
within  the  target  area)  is  averaged,  a  net  increase  also  seems  to  result 
from  seeding.96 

The  following  specific  results  of  the  experiment  from  analyses  to 
dato  have  been  summarized  by  Woodley,  et  al. : 97 

The  many  overall  and  specialized  analyses  presented  in  this  paper  lead  to  the 
strong  indication  that  dynamic  seeding  increased  areal  rainfall  in  FACE,  by 
altering  convective  processes  on  the  mesoscale  and  promoting  cloud  merger. 
Rainfall  in  the  floating  and  total  targets  was  greater  in  the  mean  (about  50  per- 
cent in  the  floating  target  and  25  percent  in  the  total  target),  and  the  standard 
deviation  (50  percent  in  the  floating  target  and  40  percent  in  the  total  target)  on 
seed  days  than  on  control  days. 

The  authors  continue,  discussing  the  physical  basis  for  confidence : 98 

Although  FACE  has  been  an  exploratory  effort  with  an  evolving  design,  one 
can  have  considerable  confidence  in  the  interpretation  of  the  outcome.  Increases 
of  seeding  effect  based  on  rain  gage  measurements  agree  with  those  based  on 
gage-adjusted  radar.  The  microphysical  measurements  within  seeded  clouds 
provide  clear  evidence  for  anomalous  glaciation  relative  to  their  unseeded  counter- 
parts. *  *  *  The  time-dependence  of  the  seeding  effect  and  its  dependence  upon  the 
number  of  flares  expended  are  consistent  with  an  effect  of  seeding. 

In  fiscal  year  1977,  FACE  activities  have  included  a  thorough  anal- 
ysis of  available  experimental  data  and  additional  research  in  order  to 
establish  the  physical  basis  for  FACE  rainfall  results.  During  fiscal 
year  1978  there  will  be  further  analysis  of  data  and  results  obtained 
from  field  programs  in  order  to  solidify,  both  physically  and  statisti- 
cally, the  encouraging  preliminary  results,  showing  a  rainfall  increase 
over  the  entire  13,000  km2  experimental  area  on  seed  days  versus  non- 
seed  days.99 

The  implications  of  this  work  to  the  needs  of  hydrology  and  agricul- 
ture demand  that  it  be  continued  and  expanded.  A  confirmatory  dy- 
namic seeding  effort  will  be  conducted  in  an  area  where  there  is  both 
need  and  a  favorable  meteorological  and  societal  climate  for  such  a 
program.1  Preliminary  studies  are  underway  to  identify  possible  addi- 

86  Woodlev,  William  L.,  Joanne  Simpson,  Ronald  Biondini.  and  Jill  Jordan.  "NOAA's 
Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment ;  Rainfall  Results.  1970-76."  in  preprints  from  Sixth 
Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification.  Champaign-Urbana,  111., 
Oct.  10-13.  1977.  American  Meteorological  Society.  Boston.  1977,  p.  209. 

87  Woodlev.  Jordan.  Simpson.  Biondini.  and  Flueck,  "NOAA's  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Ex- 
periment ;  Rainfall  Results  :  1970-1976."  1978. 

M  Ibid.,  p.  58. 

98  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science.  Engineering,  and  Technology.  Interdepart- 
mental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences.  "National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Frogram  : 
Fiscal  Year  1978,"  ICAS  21-FY  78,  September  1977,  p.  88. 

1  Woodlev.  Simpson,  Biondini.  and  Jordan,  "NOAA's  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment; 
Rainfall  Results,  1970-76,"  1977,  p.  209. 


295 


tional  sites  for  field  experiments  during  fiscal  year  1979.  The  long- 
range  objective  of  the  program  is  to  make  the  technology  developed  in 
Florida  available  to  otlier  areas  in  the  United  States  which  are  charac- 
terized by  periods  when  most  of  the  rainfall  is  provided  by  convective 
showers. 

Preliminary  plans  have  been  developed  to  conduct  a  summer  cumu- 
lus experiment,  along  the  lines  of  FACE,  in  the  cornbelt  of  the  Mid- 
west, in  an  attempt  to  determine  the  transferability  of  the  FACE 
results.  A  very  suitable  region  for  such  a  field  experiment  appears  to 
be  in  central  Illinois,  and  plans  for  the  proposed  Precipitation  Aug- 
mentation for  Crops  Experiment  (PACE)  have  been  concentrated  on 
this  area,  whose  location  is  shown  in  figure  14. 2  Initial  plans  for  the 


Figure  14. — Map  showing  the  location  of  the  target  area  for  the  proposed  precipi- 
tation Augmentation  for  Crops  Experiment  (PACE)  (from  Ackerman  and  Sax, 
1977). 

Note. — Shown  for  each  State  is  its  1975  value  of  farm  products  in  billions  of  dollars,  and 
its  resulting  national  rank. 


2  Ackerman,  Bernice.  and  Robert  I.  Sax.  precipitation  augmentation  for  crops  experi- 
ment (PACE),  presentation  to  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification 
Advisory  Board,  Champaign,  111..  Oct.  13,  1977. 


296 


meteorological  program  are  being  developed  by  the  Illinois  State 
Water  Survey  and  NOAA's  NHEML,  and  interest  in  the  program  has 
been  indicated  by  scientists  from  four  midwestern  universities,  the 
University  of  Virginia,  and  the  NHEML.  A  four-stage  experiment  is 
now  contemplated,  which  could  extend  over  a  9-  to  13-year  span,  with 
costs  ranging  from  $8.5  to  $10.5  million.3 

Project  Stormfury 

NOAA's  largest  effort  in  weather  modification  has  been  Project 
Stormfury,  conducted  by  the  National  Hurricane  and  Experimental 
Meteorology  Laboratory  (NHEML)  and  aimed  at  developing  methods 
for  moderating  the  most  destructive  peak  winds  in  hurricanes.  The 
project  is  designed  to  investigate  the  structure  and  dynamics  of  tropi- 
cal cyclones  and  their  potential  for  modification.  The  range  of  activi- 
ties under  Stormfury  includes  development  of  mathematical  models ; 
theoretical  and  diagnostic  investigations  and  calculations;  field  re- 
search on  hurricane  structure,  variability,  and  dynamics ;  and  actual 
hurricane  modification  experiments.4 

The  earliest  known  hurricane  modification  attempt  occurred  Octo- 
ber 13,  1947,  when  General  Electric  Co.  scientists  and  technicians, 
under  Government  contract,  dropped  dry  ice  into  the  thin,  stratified 
clouds  outside  the  walls  of  a  hurricane  east  of  Jacksonville,  Fla. 
Equipment  suitable  for  monitoring  the  structure,  intensity,  and  move- 
ment of  the  storm  during  this  operation  was  not  available ;  however, 
some  localized  changes  in  the  thin-layered  cloud  were  noted  by  visual 
observation.  Subsequent  studies  indicate  that  this  operation  could  have 
had  little  effect  on  the  storm.  The  experiments  from  which  the  present 
project  evolved  began  in  1961,  though  Project  Stormfury  was  formally 
established  in  1962  as  a  combined  program  of  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce (Weather  Bureau)  and  the  Department  of  Defense  (Navy). 
Over  the  years  the  National  Science  Foundation  has  provided  support 
to  various  parts  of  the  program,  and  the  U.S.  Air  Force  became  an 
active  participant  in  the  late  1960,s.  Since  the  Defense  Department's 
decision  to  discontinue  joint  sponsorship  in  1973,  the  program  has  been 
conducted  primarily  by  the  Commerce  Department.5  Aircraft  from  the 
Air  Force  and  from  the  National  Aeronautics  and  Space  Administra- 
tion (NASA)  are  available  for  future  experiments  and  storm  moni- 
toring. 

The  concept  behind  Stormfury  seeding  is  that  dynamic  seeding  of 
cumulus  cloud  towers  just  outside  of  the  eyewall  of  the  hurricane 
causes  these  clouds  to  develop  vertically  until  they  replace  the  original 
eyewall.  The  effect  is  to  increase  the  diameter  of  the  eye,  reducing  the 
maximum  winds  in  the  new  eyewall. 

Under  this  program,  four  storms  have  actually  been  seeded  between 
1961  and  1971;  the  tracks  of  these  storms  are  shown  in  figure  15.  In 
the  first  storm,  Hurricane  Esther,  clouds  near  the  eyewall  were  seeded 
with  relatively  small  amounts  of  silver  iodide  on  September  16  and 
17,  1961.  After  the  experiment  of  September  16  there  was  an  apparent 
10-percent  recorded  reduction  in  maximum  wind  speed,  but  little 
change  was  observed  on  Septemlxu-  17,  owing  perhaps  to  seeding  in  a 


3  Ibid. 

4  Sheets,  Robert  C,  "Project  Stormfury  :  Questions  and  Answers."  U.S.  Department  of 
Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Environmental  Research 
Laboratories,  National  Hurricane  and  Experimental  Meteorology  Laboratory,  Coral  Gables, 
Fla..  1077,  p.  1. 

°  Ibid. 


297 


cloud-free  zone.  Similar  single-seeding  experiments  were  conducted 
on  August  23  and  24,  1963,  in  Hurricane  Beulah,  with  similar  results; 
that  is,  an  apparent  10-  to  14-percent  reduction  in  wind  speed  on 
AujTust  24,  but  little  change  on  August  23.  Errors  in  delivery  of  the 
seeding  agent  were  subsequently  attributed  to  the  poor  radar  systems 
used  at  the  time.6 


Figure  15. — Tracks  of  all  hurricanes  which  have  been  seeded  from  1961  to  1971. 
Times  and  locations  of  seedings  are  indicated.  (From  Sheets,  1977.) 

The  greatest  apparent  success  was  achieved  in  experiments  on  Hur- 
ricane Debbie  on  August  18  and  20,  1969,  when  maximum  wind  speed 
reductions  of  30  and  15  percent,  respectively,  were  observed.  The  reduc- 
tion on  August  18  followed  five  seeding  events  at  2-hour  intervals 
over  an  8-hour  period.  Debbie  was  not  seeded  on  August  19  and 
regained  strength ;  and  the  observed  reduction  on  August  20  followed 
the  same  seeding  procedure  used  on  August  18.  Although  the  results 
were  exciting,  an  evaluation  problem  is  that  the  observed  changes  fol- 
lowing seeding  are  within  the  natural  hurricane  variability.  Such 
-ccurrences  are  statistically  unlikely,  however,  since  a  15-percent  reduc- 
;ion  would  occur  less  than  10  percent  of  the  time  naturally,  and  a 
30-percent  reduction  is  less  than  5  percent  likely  to  occur.7 

The  last  storm  to  have  been  seeded  under  Stormfury  was  in  1971  on 
Hurricane  Ginger,  a  storm  which  did  not  have  suitable  structure  for 
eye  modification  experiments.  Clouds  were  seeded  well  away  from  the 
storm  center,  and  only  local  effects  were  detected.  Consequently,  the 
experiment  on  Ginger  ought  not  to  be  included  with  the  Esther,  Beu- 


6  Ibid.,  pp.  1-2. 

7  Ibid.,  p.  2. 


298 


lah,  and  Debbie  cases.8  Results  of  all  known  hurricane  seeding  experi- 
ments are  summarized  in  table  16.  The  1947  storm  and  Hurricane 
Ginger  in  1971,  results  from  which  are  much  less  definitive  than  those 
of  the  other  cases,  are  discussed  in  footnotes  to  the  table. 

To  minimize  the  possibility  that  a  populated  region  might  experi- 
ence adverse  effects  from  a  hurricane  seeding  experiment,  many  safe- 
guards have  been  built  into  Stormfury.  Although  all  results  to  date 
have  been  either  positive  or  neutral,  strict  guidelines  are  maintained 
in  selection  of  storms  to  be  seeded.9  To  be  eligible  for  seeding,  a  hurri- 
cane must  be  predicted  to  be  within  700  nautical  miles  (1,100  kilome- 
ters) of  the  operating  base — Miami  or  San  Juan — for  at  least  12  hours 
and  have  maximum  winds  of  at  least  65  knots.  There  will  be  no  seed- 
ing if  the  predicted  track  of  the  hurricane  has  more  than  a  10-percent 
chance  of  approaching  within  50  miles  of  a  populated  land  area  with- 
in 24  hours  after  the  seeding.10  Consequently,  few  opportunities  have 

TABLE  16.— RESULTS  OF  EXPERIMENTS  IN  SEEDING  HURRICANE  CLOUDS  NEAR  THE  EYEWALL*2 


Approximate 
Silver  iodide  maximum 
Number  of  used3        wind  speed 


Nane  and  date  seedings  (number,  kilogram)  change  (percent) 


Huiricane  Esther: 

Sept.  16,  1961   1  8/35.13  -10 

Sept.  17,  1961   1  8/35.13  <0 

Hurricane  Beulah: 

Aug.  23,  1963   1  55/219.96  <0 

Aug.  24,  1963   1  67/235.03  -14 

Hurricane  Debbie: 

Aug.  18,  1969   5  976/185.44  -30 

Aug.  20,  1969   5  978/185.82  -15 


1  In  addition,  a  hurricane  was  seeded  Oct.  13, 1947,  and  Hurricane  Ginger  was  seeded  Sept.  26  and  28, 1971.  The  clouds 
seeded  in  these  storms  were  far  different  and  the  seedings  were  done  in  a  different  fashion  than  for  the  storms  listed  above. 
-  From  sheets.  Project  Stormfury :  (Questions  and  Answers.  1977.) 

3  Values  in  column  are  for  totil  number  of  units  and  total  kilograms  of  silver  iodide  used  each  day  (based  on  records 
kept  by  Sheldon  D.  Elliot,  Ji.).  Test  results  indicate  the  smaller  seeding  pyrotechnic  units  make  more  efficient  use  of  the 
silver  iodide. 

4  Pyrotechnics  dropped  outside  seedable  clouds. 


been  afforded  by  nature  for  these  experiments.  Furthermore,  analyses 
of  past  cases,  particularly  the  Debbie  experiments,  have  shown  the 
need  for  more  sophisticated  aircraft  and  instrumentation,  so  that- 
actual  field  experiments  were  discontinued  in  1972,  while  state-of-the- 
art  aircraft  and  instrumentation  were  procured. 

Several  alternatives  have  been  considered  for  increasing  the  number 
of  suitable  experimental  situations  over  a  given  time  period.  One  ap- 
proach would  be  to  move  the  project  to  an  area  where  nature  provides 
more  opportunities  statistically,  such  as  the  western  Pacific  Ocean.  Or, 
operations  could  be  combined  for  a  number  of  areas,  such  as  the  North 
Atlantic  and  the  eastern  North  Pacific  or  the  North  Atlantic  and  Aus- 
tralian storm  areas.  Another  possibility  is  to  relax  selection  criteria, 
but  this  does  not  seem  to  be  a  desirable  choice  for  the  near  future.11 


« Ibid.,  p.  3. 
8  Ibid.,  p.  4. 

10  U  S  Department  of  Commerce  News.  "Stormfury — 1977  to  Seed  One  Atlantic  Hurri- 
cane." news  release,  NOAA  77-248.  Kockville,  Md.,  Sept.  20,  1977,  p.  1. 

11  Sheets,  "Project  Stormfury  :  Questions  and  Answers,"  1977,  p.  5. 


299 


Tentative  plans  were  formulated  to  conduct  seeding  experiments  on 
typhoons  of  the  western  Pacific  in  view  of  the  greater  frequency  of 
suitable  storms  in  that  region.  These  plans  were  canceled,  however, 
when  protests  were  received  from  the  Governments  of  Japan  and  main- 
land China,  although  the  Philippines  had  been  favorable  to  such  ex- 
periments. Meteorological  satellite  observations  have  shown  that  hur- 
ricanes and  tropical  storms  in  the  eastern  North  Pacific  (to  the  west  of 
Central  America)  occur  more  frequently  than  thought  previously,  the 
number  in  that  region  exceeding  those  in  the  western  North  Atlantic  in 
recent  years.  Hence,  a  significant  increase  in  opportunities  for  hur- 
ricane research  can  be  achieved  by  including  eastern  Pacific  storms.12 
This  would  require  a  formal  agreement  with  Mexico,  with  whose  of- 
ficials bilateral  consultations  have  begun,  and  with  other  countries  that 
may  be  directly  affected  by  the  hurricanes  which  are  eligible  for  seed- 
ing.13 

In  the  interim  since  1972,  new  instrumentation  has  been  developed, 
especially  in  the  field  of  cloud  physics,  and  NOAA's  instrumented  air- 
craft has  been  updated  and  augmented  in  preparation  for  research  ex- 
periments in  1977  if  suitable  storms  become  available.  During  the  1976 
hurricane  season,  XHEML  personnel  utilized  two  new  aircraft  for  the 
first  time  in  research  hurricane  reconnaissance.  The  complement  of  five 
aircraft  now  available  for  Stormfury  include  three  from  the  NOAA 
Research  Facilities  Center  and  one  each  from  the  Air  Force  and 
NASA. 

Since  1972  Stormfury  research  has  concentrated  on  special  observa- 
tional programs  to  provide  data  on  hurricane  structure  and  microphys- 
ical  processes  and  on  analytical  and  theoretical  studies  to  improve 
their  description  and  understanding.  There  has  been  a  major  emphasis 
on  development  of  mathematical  models  to  simulate  the  development, 
structure,  and  behavior  of  hurricanes  in  the  natural  state  and  when 
seeded.  A  more  explicit  seeding  hypothesis  has  been  denned  from  the 
results  of  this  research,  which  will  also  benefit  evaluation  of  future 
seeding  experiments.14 

Plans  were  formulated  for  one  hurricane  seeding  experiment  in  the 
Atlantic  in  1977,  if  conditions  were  suitable,  as  a  rehearsal  for  full- 
scale  resumption  of  multiple  experiments  during  1978,  using  the  five 
newly  instrumented  aircraft.  For  hurricanes  not  suitable  or  eligible  for 
such  experiments,  emphasis  will  be  on  acquisition  of  further  informa- 
tion on  the  structure  and  natural  variability  of  hurricanes  on  the  24- 
to  36-hour  timescale  characteristic  of  the  seeding  experiments.15 

The  purpose  of  Stormfury  is  the  establishment  of  a  modification 
hypothesis  at  a  confidence  level  high  enough  that  the  techniques  can 
be  taken  from  the  experimental  stage  and  used  operationally.16  It  is 

12  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric S-ienre*.  •'National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  Fiscal  Year  1977."  ICAS  20- 
FY77,  May  1976,  p.  89. 

13  Epstein.  Edward  S..  in  testimony  before  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the 
Atmosphere,  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  U.S.  House  of  Representatives, 
on  NOAA's  atmospheric  and  oceanic  environmental  research  and  development,  Mav  18.  1977. 

"  Ibid. 

13  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science.  Engineering,  and  Technology,  Interdepart- 
mental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences.  ICAS  21-FY78.  1977,  p.  88. 
16  Sheets,  "Project  Stormfury  :  Questions  and  Answers."  1977.  p.  10. 


300 


felt  that  10  to  12  seeding  experiments  are  required  to  verify  the 
Stormfury  hypothesis,  taking  at  least  two  or  three  full  hurricane  sea- 
sons to  realize  sufficient  seeding  opportunities.17 

Research  Facilities  Center  {RFC) 

The  NOAA  Research  Facilities  Center,  formerly  the  Research 
Flight  Facility,  is  an  operational  and  technical  support  organization 
whose  mission  is  to  provide  instrumented  aircraft  to  meet  the  cloud- 
seeding  and  airborne  measurements  needs  of  NOAA  and  other  gov- 
ernmentally  sponsored  research  programs.18 

A  program  of  modernization  for  this  facility  was  begun  in  fiscal 
year  1973  and  completed  in  fiscal  year  1977.  In  fiscal  year  1973  three  of 
the  then  existing  NOAA  aircraft  (an  RB-57  and  two  DC-6's)  were 
deactivated,  but  the  C-130  was  retained.  Two  new  P-3  aircraft  were 
acquired  in  the  following  years  and,  with  the  C-130,  were  instru- 
mented with  the  most  modern  and  sophisticated  meteorological  and 
oceanographic  research  measurement  systems  available.19  Instrumen- 
tation includes  inertial/omega/doppler  navigation  systems,  data  re- 
cording/processing/display systems,  dropwindsonde  systems,  cloud 
physics  measurement  devices,  radar  systems,  cloud-seeding  equipment, 
gust  probes,  and  photographic  systems.20 

Global  Monitoring  for  Climatic  Change  (GMCC) 

This  program,  considered  as  part  of  NOAA's  total  weather  modifi- 
cation research  effort,  is  designed  to  provide  quantitative  data  needed 
to  understand  and  predict  climatic  changes.  Data  are  derived  from 
measurements  of  existing  amounts  of  natural  and  manmade  trace  con- 
stituents in  the  atmosphere,  from  which  are  determined  the  rates  of 
increase  or  decrease  in  these  trace  amounts  and  their  possible  effects 
on  climate  change.21 

Measurements  are  made  at  a  network  of  baseline  observations  at 
four  stations — Point  Barrow,  Alaska ;  Mauna  Loa,  Hawaii ;  American 
Samoa;  and  South  Pole,  Antarctica.  Measurements  at  these  baseline 
observatories  include  determination  of  concentrations  of  carbon  diox- 
ide, carbon  monoxide,  and  surface  and  total  ozone;  of  solar-terrestrial 
radiation ;  of  atmospheric  aerosols ;  of  precipitation  chemistry ;  and  of 
standard  meteorological  variables — wind,  temperature,  humidity,  pre- 
cipitation, and  pressure.  The  program  also  includes  the  development 
of  new  and  improved  measurement  systems  for  atmospheric  trace  con- 
stituents for  observatory  use,  data  reduction  and  quality  control  of 
observations,  and  analysis  of  the  data  in  terms  of  climatic  variations.22 


17  Epstein,  testimony  before  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere, 
House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology,  U.S.  House  of  Representatives,  May  18. 
1977. 

18  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology,  Interdepart- 
mental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  ICAS  21-FY78,  1977,  p.  8S. 

19  Ibid. 

20  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
phere Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77.  1976.  pn.  89-90. 

21  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology,  Interdepart- 
mental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  ICAS  21-FY78,  1977,  pp.  88-89. 

12  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  "National  Atmospheric  Sciences  Program  :  Fiscal  Year  197o,"  ICAS  18- 
FY75,  May  1974,  p.  79. 


301 


In  the  past  there  have  been  cooperative  projects  with  the  University  of 
Rhode  Island  and  for  the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency  and 
the  U.S.  Energy  Research  and  Development  Administration. 

The  program  also  includes  a  seven  station  network  in  the  continuous 
United  States  for  measuring  total  atmospheric  ozone.  An  eighth  sta- 
tion is  planned  for  installation  in  California  during  fiscal  year  1978. 
The  world  standard  ozone  spectrophotometer  is  maintained  by  the 
GMCC  program,  and  during  fiscal  year  1977  an  intercomparison  of 
seven  secondary  standards  of  various  countries  with  the  NOAA  stand- 
ard was  conducted  at  Boulder,  Colo.23 

During  fiscal  year  1978  the  GMCC  program  plans  are  as  follows : 24 

A  careful  analysis  of  a  number  of  atmospheric  parameters  important  in 
climatic  assessment  will  be  continued  and  expanded.  Global  surface  and  tropo- 
spheric  temperature  records  will  be  updated  and  interpreted  in  terms  of  possi- 
ble causes  for  the  observed  variability.  Total  ozone,  and  the  vertical  distribution 
of  ozone,  and  stratospheric  water  vapor  measurements  will  be  analyzed  to  detect 
trends  and  further  understand  the  causes  for  their  fluctuations.  The  dura- 
tion of  sunshine,  probably  reflecting  cloudiness  over  the  United  States  will  be 
studied  with  updated  information.  The  size  of  the  300-millibar  (ten-kilometer 
altitude)  circumpolar  vortex  will  be  followed ;  this  quantity  shows  some  promise 
of  being  a  monthly  or  seasonal  climatic  predictive  tool.  Fluorocarbon-11  and 
-12  measurements  at  Adrigole,  Ireland,  will  be  analyzed  in  the  light  of  the  source 
of  the  air  mass  reaching  that  location.  Finally,  work  will  continue  on  the  use 
of  tetroons  to  delineate  boundary  layer  air  trajectories  in  urban  areas  and  else- 
where. This  research  is  of  use  in  certain  air  pollution  problems. 

L  ig  lit  hi  g  suppression 

In  recent  years  NOAA  has  conducted  a  small  experimental  effort 
in  lightning  suppression,  using  fine  metalized  nylon  fibers — or  chaff — 
as  a  seeding  agent.  Based  on  a  theoretical  model,  a  field  program  was 
initiated  in  1972  to  test  the  chaff  seeding  concept  and  to  determine  the 
effect  of  such  seeding  on  the  electric  fields  of  thunderstorms.  Storms 
are  seeded  from  below,  and,  based  on  data  from  10  seeded  storms  and 
18  unseeded  control  storms,  the  number  of  lightning  occurrences  was 
about  25  percent  of  those  observed  in  the  control  storms.  The  experi- 
ments were  not  strictly  randomized;  however,  the  observed  differ- 
ences between  seeded  and  control  storms  was  statistically  significant.25 
'  During  the  1975  Apollo-Soyuz  launch,  aircraft  were  on  standby 
for  possible  lightning-suppression  flights  at  Cape  Canaveral.  Re- 
search on  thunderstorm  electrofication  at  the  Kennedy  Space  Center  is 
a  cooperative  program  with  NOAA,  NASA,  the  Department  of  De- 
fense, and  several  universities.26 

M odification  of  extratropical  severe  storms 

Research  has  been  conducted  by  NOAA  on  the  possibilities  of  mod- 
erating and  modifying  mesoscale  cloud  systems  associated  with  severe 
storms,  including  thunderstorms,  tornadoes,  and  cyclonic  storm  sys- 

23  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology,  Interdepart- 
mental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  ICAS  21-FY78,  1977,  p.  89. 
2*  Ibid. 

25  Townsend,  John  W.,  Jr.,  in  U.S.  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Committee  on  Sci- 
ence and  Technology,  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  "Weather 
Modification."  hearings,  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  June  15-18,  1976.  Washington,  D.C.,  U.S. 
Government  Printing  Office,  1976,  p.  171. 
16  Ibid.,  p.  172. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  22 


302 


terns.  Critical  to  this  research  are  studies  in  atmospheric  physics  and 
atmospheric  chemistry  that  are  aimed  at  understanding  the  role  of 
particular  materials  as  condensation  and  ice-freezing  nuclei  and  in 
influencing  the  dynamics  and  structures  of  clouds.27  Research  objec- 
tives of  this  program  of  NOAA's  Atmospheric  Physics  and  Chemis- 
try Laboratory  ( APCL)  include : 28 

1.  Expanding  current  knowledge  and  documenting  descriptions 
of  the  behavior  of  extratropical  weather  systems ; 

2.  Improving  the  accuracy  and  detail  in  short-range  predic- 
tions— 24  hours  or  less — of  both  natural  and  modified  severe 
weather  systems  through  development,  verification,  and  refine- 
ment of  numerical  mesoscale  models ; 

3.  Identifying  and  testing,  through  numerical  experiments 
using  the  recently  mesoscale  model,  modification  hypotlieses,  and 
procedures  that  appear  to  inhibit  or  suppress  severe  attending 
extratropical  weather  systems ; 

4.  Establishing  data  requirements  for  field  programs  including 
observations  needed  for  developing  an  understanding  and  a  pre- 
diction capability  through  numerical  modelling ;  and 

5.  Designing  field  modification  experiments  to  test  the  most 
promising  hypotheses. 

Research  at  APCL  includes  efforts  to  measure  and  define  relation- 
ships between  numbers  and  chemical  composition  of  natural  and  man- 
made  nuclei  and  aerosols  and  to  determine  their  impact  on  cloud  and 
precipitation  mechanisms.  Nuclei  inventories  are  made  prior  to,  dur- 
ing, and  after  cloud-seeding  experiments  to  permit  evaluation  of  the 
efficiency  of  artificial  nuclei  generating  techniques,  their  efficiency  in 
cloud  glaciation,  and  atmospheric  residence  times.  Research  is  also 
directed  toward  optimization  of  cloud-seeding  techniques  and  existing 
analysis  methods.29 

DEPARTMENT  OF  DEFENSE 

Introduction 

The  weather  modification  research,  development,  and  operations 
carried  on  by  the  Department,  of  Defense  are  intended  primarily  to 
protect  men  and  materials  from  environmental  hazards  and  to  be 
aware  of  current  and  developing  weather  modification  technologies 
in  order  to  avoid  technological  surprise  by  potential  adversaries.30  31 
Recent  and  planned  expenditures  by  Defense  for  both  operational  and 
research  efforts  in  weather  modification  for  fiscal  year  1977  through 
fiscal  year  1979  are  shown  in  table  17. 

Air  Force  fog  dispersal  operations 

The  U.S.  Air  Force  conducts  the  only  operational  weather  modifi- 
cation activities  in  the  Department  of  Defense  and  the  only  regular 

27  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
phric  Seines.  ICAS  18-FY75.  1974.  pp.  77-78. 

-  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77,  1976.  p.  89. 

:»  Ibid. 

80  Ruggles,  Kenneth  \V.,  briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  weather  modification  programs 
for  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  Washington.  D.C..  May  31.  1977,  p.  1. 

yl  See  app.  B  for  a  statement  of  the  current  official  position  of  the  Department  of  Defense 
on  weather  modification. 


303 


identifiable  federally  sponsored  operational  program.  This  Air  Force 
program  provides  a  capability  to  dissipate  cold  fogs  at  two  Air  Force 
bases — Fairchild  AFB,  Washington,  and  Elmendorf  AFB,  Alaska — 
permitting  use  of  these  airfields  and  improvement  of  flight  safety  dur- 
ing cold  fog  conditions.  At  these  installations  a  ground-based  disper- 
sion system  is  used  for  spraying  liquid  propane  into  the  atmosphere 
upwind  of  the  target  area  to  be  cleared.  Vaporization  of  the  propane 
induces  local  cooling,  with  attendant  formation  and  growth  of  ice 
crystals  at  the  expense  of  water  droplets,  dissipating  the  fog.32 

A  capability  is  also  maintained  by  the  Air  Force  for  dispersal  of 
crushed  dry  ice  from  TTC-130  weather  reconnaisance  aircraft  if  the 
need  should  arise  for  dissipation  of  cold  fog  at  locations  not  equipped 
with  ground-based  systems. 

TABLE  17.— DEPARTMENT  OF  DEFENSE  PLANNED  EXPENDITURES  FOR  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  OPERATIONS 
AND  RESEARCH,  FISCAL  YEAR  1977  THROUGH  FISCAL  YEAR  1979 

•fin  thousands  of  dollars] 


Fiscal  year— 

1977 

1978 

1979 

Operations:  Air  Force 1  

  53 

82 

70 

Research  and  development: 2 

Army:  Cold  fog  dispersal..    

  237  . 

Navy:  Cold  fog  dispersal     

  226 

210 

Air  Force: 

Cold  fog  and  stratus  dispersal  

Warm  fog  dispersal3  

  550 

1,400 

778 
2,  200 

714 
1,200 

Total,  research  and  development.   

2,413 

3,188 

1,914 

•i  Estimates  of  pro  rated  costs  for  operational  cold  fog  dispersal  at  Air  Force  bases,  from  Capt.  Kenneth  W.  Ruggles  in  brief- 
ing on  Department  of  Defense  weather  modification  programs  for  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  May  31,  1977. 

■  Data  for  basic  research  on  weather  modification  differs  from  entries  in  table  2,  based  on  1977  inputs  to  ICAS;  data 
above  on  research  and  development  were  received  Apr.  27,  1978,  from  Col.  Elbert  W.  Friday,  Office  of  the  Under  Secretary 
of  Defense  for  Research  and  Engineering. 

3  Includes  costs  for  engineering  development  of  a  warm  fog  dispersal  system  as  well  as  expenditures  for  basic  research 
n  warm  fog  dispersal. 


The  dry  ice  particles  falling  through  the  fog  sublimate,  causing  a 
large  temperature  decrease  in  their  vicinity,  so  that  the  resulting  ice 
particles  which  form  and  grow  at  the  expense  of  supercooled  fog  drop- 
lets will  fall  out  as  snow.  This  capability  has  not  been  used  since  fiscal 
year  1976,  and  the  dry  ice  crushers  are  currently  stored  at  Keesler 
AFB,  Miss.  The  Air  Force  plans  continued  use  of  these  techniques, 
however,  to  reduce  adverse  weather  effects  due  to  fog  on  airfield  opera- 
tions and  flight  safety.33 

Army  research  and  development 

Research  and  development  efforts  in  weather  modification  are  con- 
ducted by  all  three  services  in  the  Department  of  Defense  to  some 
extent.  Although  the  Army  has  terminated  its  technical  base  program, 
one  equipment  item,  a  mobile  cold  fog  dissipator,  is  in  the  engineering 


32  Ruggles.  briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  weather  modification  programs  for  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977.  p.  1. 

33  Ibid.,  p.  2. 


304 


development  phase.34  This  gear,  intended  to  provide  a  capability  for 
dissipating  supercooled  fog  at  Army  airfields,  helipads,  and  artillery 
sites,  employs  the  propane  dispenser  technology  to  remove  fog  in  local 
areas.  The  system  is  to  be  field  tested  in  Alaska  during  1978.35  Army 
research  on  warm  fogs,  now  terminated,  had  been  directed  toward 
dispersal  through  a  variety  of  possible  techniques,  including  helicopter 
downwash,  use  of  hygroscopic  materials,  and  application  of  heat. 

Navy  research  and  development 

The  research  weather  modification  effort  of  the  Navy  is  now  con- 
cerned with  evaluation  of  weather  modification  experimental  data  and 
of  state-of-the-art  techniques  in  order  to  avoid  technological  surprise. 
Instruments  and  methods  have  been  developed  to  study  fog,  clouds, 
and  natural  weather  processes,  utilizing  measurements  of  dewpoint, 
liquid  water  distribution,  cloud  and  fog  droplet  and  ice  particle  sizes, 
and  number  of  cloud  condensation  nuclei.  Recent  investigations  have 
been  directed  toward  generation,  characterization,  and  evaluation  of 
active  agents  to  inhibit  or  enhance  the  formation,  growth,  coalescence, 
removal,  and  frequency  of  cloud  and  fog  water  droplets  and  toward 
understanding  the  mechanisms  and  theories  applicable  to  these  proc- 
esses. Numerical  modeling  of  the  fog  or  cloud  system  has  been  used  to 
design  experiments  and  to  define  and  evaluate  the  physical  processes 
which  occur  in  field  experiments.36 

The  principal  ongoing  Navy  research  program  in  weather  modifica- 
tion has  been  a  statistical  analysis  to  evaluate  data  from  the  Santa 
Barbara  cold  cloud  modification  experiments.37  While  not  a  large 
effort,  it  is  an  important  attempt  to  examine  alternatives  for  reducing 
uncertainty  in  evaluating  weather  modification  experiments.  No  fur- 
ther field  experiments  are  currently  planned  by  the  Navy.38 

In  the  recent  past,  the  Navy  has  also  sponsored  major  projects 
related  to  warm  fog  modification.  Field  experiments  were  conducted 
by  the  Naval  Weapons  Center,  China  Lake,  Calif. ;  computer  simula- 
tion studies  have  been  underway  at  the  Navy  Environmental  Predic- 
tion Research  Facility.  Monetery,  Calif.;  the  Naval  Research  Labo- 
ratory, Washington,  D.C.,  has  been  developing  instrumentation  and 
conducting  studies  related  to  cloud  particle  and  cloud  nuclei  prop- 
erties; a  standard  evaluation  site  near  Macon.  Ga.,  was  under  develop- 
ment; and  the  Office  of  Naval  Research  has  provided  support  for  a 
variety  of  investigations.39 

Air  Force  research  and  development 

Air  Force  research  projects  in  weather  modification  are  currently 
directed  toward  dispersal  of  warm  fog  and  stratiform  clouds.  Devel- 

34  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  20-FY77.  1976.  p.  91. 

35  Ruggles.  briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  weather  modification  programs  for  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  1977.  p.  2. 

38  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  20-FY77.  1976.  p.  91. 

37  Ruggles.  "Briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  Weather  Modification  Programs  for  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board."  1977.  p.  2.  (The  second  Santa  Barbara  randomized 
seeding  project  was  conducted  by  North  American  Weather  Consultants  from  1967  through 
1970.  under  contract  to  the  Naval  Weapons  Center,  China  Lake,  Calif.) 

38  Ibid. 

39  Moschandreas.  Demetrios  J..  "Present  Capabilities  To  Modify  Warm  Fog  and  Stratus." 
Geomet.  Inc..  technical  report  for  the  Office  of  Naval  Research  and  the  Naval  Air  Systems 
Command,  contract  No.  N00014-71-C-0271,  Geomet  report  No.  EF-300,  Jan.  18,  1974,  p.  5. 


305 


opment  of  a  prototype  warm  fog  dispersal  system  planned  for  even- 
tual installation  at  an  Air  Force  base  is  underway.  The  system  devel- 
opment tests  will  be  conducted  at  Otis  AFB,  Mass.,  and  the  field  pro- 
gram will  be  supplemented  with  modeling  studies  in  order  to  develop 
relationships  between  windspeed  and  the  heat  and  thrust  requirements 
of  the  dispersal  system.40 

The  system  includes  a  number  of  combustors  positioned  along  a 
runway  and  its  approaches.  The  burn  rate  of  the  combustors  is  to  be 
controlled  precisely  by  a  computer  which  monitors  meteorological 
instruments  in  the  runway  area.41  Such  a  system,  using  both  heat  and 
thrust,  is  termed  a  thermokinetic  system.  The  expected  warming  of 
the  air  over  runway  and  approaches  by  2°  to  3°  C  above  ambient 
temperature  should  result  in  lowering  the  relative  humidity  and 
evaporation  of  the  fog  droplets.  Figure  16  shows  the  expected  clear- 
ing geometry  for  the  system.  Upon  successful  completion  of  the  field 
tests  in  1979,  it  is  expected  that  an  operational  warm  fog  dispersal 
system  will  be  designed  and  installed  at  an  Air  Force  base  by  1982.42 
The  bulk  of  the  Air  Force  research  funding  shown  in  table  17  covers 
development  and  testing  of  this  system  at  Otis  Air  Force  Base.43 


Figure  16.  Clearing  Geometry  of  the  Warm  Fog  Dispersal  System,  Under  De- 
velopment by  the  U.S.  Air  Force.  (From  Kunkel.  The  Design  of  a  Warm  Fog 
Dispersal  System.  1977.) 


Another  Air  Force  project  is  directed  toward  development  of  an 
operational  technique  for  dispersal  of  supercooled  stratus  clouds.  Field 


40  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  20-FY77.  1976.  p.  91. 

41  Ruggles,  "Briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  Weather  Modification  Programs  for  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  '  1977,  p.  3. 

42  Kunkel.  Bruce  A..  "The  Design  of  a  Warm  Fog  Dispersal  System,"  Sixth  Conference  on 
Plannpd  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification,  American  Meteorological  Society,  Cham- 
paign-Urbana,  111.,  Oct.  10-13,  1977,  pp.  174-176. 

43  Ruggles,  "Briefing  on  the  Department  of  Defense  Weather  Modification  Programs  for 
the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977,  p.  3. 


306 


experiments  and  numerical  modeling  will  be  used  to  estimate  quanti- 
ties and  types  of  seeding  materials  suitable  for  dispersal  under  a  wide 
range  of  meteorological  conditions.44  Under  the  auspices  of  the  Air 
Force  Geophysics  Laboratory,  field  tests  on  supercooled  stratus  dis- 
persal were  conducted  during  February  1977  in  Michigan,  using  a 
dispensing  system  which  deployed  silver  iodide.  The  objective  of  these 
tests  was  to  produce  clearing  over  a  predetermined  ground  target.  In 
all  cases,  except  when  the  minimum  cloud  temperature  was  greater 
than  —6°  C,  clearings  were  effected.  The  tests  demonstrated  that  such 
clearings  can  be  produced  with  a  small  lightweight  delivery  system 
adaptable  for  use  on  tactical  aircraft  and  that  targeting  is  not  a 
serious  problem.  At  a  steep  elevation  angle  ground  targets  were  clearly 
visible  after  clearing,  but  they  were  obscured  by  residual  glaciated 
clouds  in  the  clearings  when  the  look  angle  was  more  shallow.  It  is 
considered  possible  that  some  of  the  residual  might  have  been  due  to 
overseeding.  In  another  planned  series  of  tests,  attempts  will  be  made 
to  optimize  the  seeding  rate  to  improve  visibilities  in  the  cleared  area. 
Other  seeding  materials  such  as  formaldehyde  and  propane,  which  are 
active  in  the  0°  C  to  —  6°  C  temperature  range,  will  also  be  tested, 
since  silver  iodide  is  not  active  above  —6°  C.  A  theoretical  study  is 
also  planned  to  determine  the  effects  various  forms  of  radiant  energy 
could  have  on  dispersal  of  warm  stratus  clouds.45 

0  verseas  operations 

In  recent  years  there  had  been  much  concern  on  the  part  of  the 
Congress  and  the  American  public  over  the  use  of  weather  modifica- 
tion as  a  weapon  of  war  in  the  war  in  Vietnam.  A  full  disclosure  of 
these  activities  and  a  discussion  of  their  effectiveness  were  provided 
by  the  Defense  Department  in  hearings  before  the  Senate  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations  in  1974.46  In  a  recent  briefing  before  the  U.S. 
Commerce  Departments  National  Weather  Modification  Advisory 
Board,  it  was  stated  that  the  current  weather  modification  activities  of 
the  Department  of  Defense  ';are  in  accord  with  the  provisions  of  the 
Convention  on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use 
of  Environmental  Modification  Techniques,  signed  at  Geneva  on  May 
18, 1977.?;  47' 48 


44  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  20-FY77,  1976,  p.  91. 

4"  Ruggles.  "Briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  Weather  Modification  Programs  for  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  '  1977,  pp.  3—4. 

46  U.S.  Congress.  Senate.  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and 
International  Environment.  "The  Need  for  an  International  Agreement  Prohibiting  the  Use 
of  Environmental  and  Geophysical  Modification  as  Weapons  of  War  and  Briefing  on  Depart- 
ment of  Defense  Weather  Modification  Activity.'  hearing,  93d  Cong..  2d  sess..  Jan.  25  and 
Mar.  20.  1974.  Washington.  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1974.  123  pp.  (Contains 
the  top  secret  hearing  held  on  Mar.  20.  1974.  which  was  made  public  on  May  19.  1974.) 

*'  IUiggles.  "Briefing  on  Department  of  Defense  Weather  Modification  Programs  for  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board."  1977.  p.  4. 

48  A  full  discussion  of  the  developments  leading  to  the  signing  of  this  convention  is  con- 
tained in  ch.  10  of  the  report,  entitled  "International  Aspects  of  Weather  Modification." 
The  full  text  of  the  draft  treaty  is  in  app.  C 


307 


Perhaps  less  well  known  than  the  use  of  weather  modification  in 
Vietnam  were  the  attempts  at  precipitation  enhancement  for  beneficial 
purposes  carried  out  by  the  U.S.  Air  Force  in  the  Philippine  Islands  at 
the  request  of  the  Philippine  Government,  This  rain  enhancement 
project,  named  GROMET  II,  was  conducted  from  April  through 
June  of  1969,  using  airborne  pyrotechnic  seeding  devices.  The  Air 
Force  had  operational  responsibility  for  the  project,  while  the  Naval 
Weapons  Center  provided  technical  direction,  and  cooperation  was 
also  provided  by  Philippine  agencies.  Although  precise  determination 
of  increased  rainfall  resulting  from  seeding  was  not  possible,  it  was 
concluded,  nevertheless,  that  rainfall  augmentation  from  tropical 
cumulus  clouds  was  accomplished  in  a  simple  operational  manner. 
Benefits  derived  from  the  project  included  improvement  in  the  agri- 
culture, increased  sugar  production,  and  augmented  crops  of  rice  and 
corn.  In  addition,  local  personnel  were  trained  in  seeding  operations, 
and,  owing  to  the  success  of  GROMET  II,  the  Government  of  the 
Philippines  conducted  similar  operations  in  subsequent  years.49  Other 
operational  attempts  to  assist  in  drought  mitigation  were  conducted  by 
the  Air  Force  in  Panama,  Portugal,  and  Okinawa. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  TRANSPORTATION 

The  weather  modification  research  and  development  activities  of  the 
Department  of  Transportation  have  been  conducted  by  the  Federal 
Aviation  Agency  (FAA),  whose  interest  has  been  focused  on  warm 
fog  dispersal  and  the  development  of  systems  for  the  removal  of  such 
fogs  from  airport  runways.  The  current  modest  effort  by  the  FAA  is 
concerned  with  monitoring  the  U.S.  Air  Force  development  program 
for  a  warm  fog  dispersal  system  50  and  with  considerations  of  imple- 
menting recommendations  of  a  major  FAA-sponsored  warm  fog 
dispersal  systems  study  which  was  completed  recently.51 

The  FAA  engineering  report  was  completed  in  November  1975,  fol- 
lowing a  2-year  study  by  an  in-house  task  force  that  was  charged  with 
determining  the  feasibility  of  a  ground-based  warm  fog  dispersal 
system  for  a  selected  U.S.  airport.  The  study  included  preparation  of 
a  conceptual  design  and  cost  estimates  for  the  proposed  system.  Given 
that  the  actual  mechanisms  to  be  used  for  fog  clearings  had  to  be  both 
theoretically  and  operationally  sound,  the  task  force  eliminated  a 
number  of  more  exotic  schemes  and  concentrated  on  design  and  cost 
estimates  for  two  candidate  fog  dispersal  approaches — (1)  a  modified 
passive  thermal  fog  dispersal  system  and  (2)  a  thermokinetic  fog  dis- 

49  St.  Amand.  Pierre.  D.  W.  Reed.  T.  L.  Wright,  and  S.D.  Elliott,  "GROMET  II :  Rainfall 
Augmentation  in  the  Philippine  Islands,"  Naval  Weapons  Center,  NWC  TP  5097,  China 
Lake.  Calif..  May  1971.  110  pp. 

50  See  discussion  of  weather  modification  research  and  development  activities  of  the  De- 
partment of  Defense,  beginning  on  p.  303. 

51  FAA  Systems  Research  and  Development  Service,  fog  dispersal  task  team,  "Ground- 
based  Warm  Fog  Dispersal  Systems:  Technique  Selection  and  Feasibility  Determination 
with  Cost  Estimates,"  Federal  Aviation  Administration,  report  No.  FAA-RD-75-126.  Final 
report.  Washington,  D.C,  November  1975,  67  pp. 


308 


persal  system.  Both  systems  depend  on  evaporation  of  the  fog  as  a 
result  of  a  small  temperature  rise;  however,  whereas  in  the  one  case 
the  natural  convective  forces  of  the  heated  atmosphere  and  the  winds 
are  relied  upon  to  mix  and  transport  the  heat  energy  throughout  the 
fog,  the  thermokinetic  technique  uses  jet  engines  to  transport  the 
heated  air  into  the  fog  by  thrust.  The  latter  technique  produces  some 
turbulence  but  not  to  a  disqualifying  degree.52  In  selecting  an  airport 
it  was  thought  important  that  there  be  a  high  annual  occurrence  of 
fog  and  a  high  air  traffic  density  during  the  hours  of  fog  for  the  sys- 
tem to  be  cost-effective.  From  38  U.S.  airports  that  were  screened  as 
potential  candidates,  Los  Angeles  International  Airport  (LAX)  was 
selected  as  the  airport  which,  in  1981,  would  gain  the  highest  poten- 
tial benefit  from  a  fog  dispersal  system  located  along  one  of  its  run- 
ways.53 Figure  17  shows  the  preliminary  configuration  of  a  single 
line  of  burners  for  a  fog  dispersal  system  installed  along  runway  25L 
at  LAX.  Costs  for  such  an  installation  are  of  the  order  of  $10  million, 
but  would  vary,  depending  on  the  kind  of  system  selected  and  the  cate- 
gory of  landing  clearance  for  which  the  system  is  designed.  Cost-to- 
benefit  ratios  vary  accordingly,  but  the  study  showed  that  15  U.S.  air- 
ports turned  out  to  have  at  least  a  1 :1  cost /benefit  ratio. 


NORTH 


LAX  -  RUNWAY  25L 


LINE  SECTION  HEAT  GENERATOR  OUTPUT  (Therms/Yd.  Hr . ) 

A  -  5000  ft.  5  to  30 

B  -  1847  ft.  9  to  55 

C  -  1847  ft.  17  to  100 

D  -  1856  ft.  20  to  120 

E  -    814  ft.  13  to  80 

D.H.  =  Decision  Height 

TOTAL  HEAT  GENERATOR  LINE  LENGTH  -  19274  ft.  for  CAT  I,   line  sections  A,  B,  C,  D. 

14504  ft.   for  CAT  II,  line  sections  A,  B.  E. 


Figure  17. — Preliminary  configuration  of  proposed  single  line  of  burners  for 
warm  fog  dispersal  system  for  runway  25L  at  Los  Angeles  International  Air- 
port. (From  Department  of  Transportation  report  FAA-RD-75-136,  by  FAA 
Fog  Dispersal  System  Task  Team,  1975.) 


The  FAA  has  contemplated  participation  in  a  joint  warm  fog  dis- 
persal demonstration  project  with  Los  Angeles  International  Airport 
and  the  U.S.  Air  Force;  however,  such  a  project  has  not  yet  been 


■  Ibid.,  p.  6. 

63  Ibid.,  pp.  10-13. 


309 


agreed  upon.  In  discussions  with  the  Air  Transport  Association  on 
this  program,  the  FAA  has  learned  about  the  concern  of  the  associa- 
tion about  increased  landing  fees  to  finance  the  system.54 

DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE 

The  Forest  Service  within  the  Department  of  Agriculture  has  car- 
ried on  weather  modification  research  aimed  at  development  of  meth- 
ods for  suppressing  cloud-to-ground  lightning  activity  as  a  means 
of  reducing  forest  fires  in  the  intermountain  west.  Forest  protection 
agencies  developed  early  interest  in  possible  application  of  weather 
modification  to  the  forest-fire  problem,  first  by  considering  the  possi- 
bility of  increasing  moisture  through  rainfall  on  dry  forests  or  on  the 
fires  directly  and,  later,  by  examining  the  potential  for  reducing  di- 
rectly the  fire-starting  capabilities  of  lightning  itself. 

The  Forest  Service  established  in  1953  a  long-range  program  of 
lightning  research,  called  Project  Skyfire,  as  part  of  its  overall  fire 
research  program.  Project  Skyfire  has  been  the  oldest  continuously 
performed  weather  modification  program  in  the  United  States  until  its 
recent  demise.55  Two  broad  objectives  of  the  project  were  (1)  to  obtain 
a  better  understanding  of  the  occurrence  and  characteristics  of  light- 
ning storms  and  lightning  fires  in  the  northern  Rocky  Mountain  region 
and  (2)  to  investigate  the  possibility  of  preventing  or  reducing  the 
number  of  lightning  fires  by  applying  techniques  of  weather  modifica- 
tion.56 

After  several  years  of  gaining  basic  information  about  mountain 
thunderstorms,  the  first  cloud  seeding  experiments  were  conducted 
under  Skyfire  in  1956  in  the  San  Francisco  peaks  area  of  Arizona,57 
Beginning  in  1960  field  programs  were  conducted  for  a  number  of 
summer  seasons  in  the  mountainous  areas  of  western  Montana.  These 
programs  included  both  experiments  designed  to  test  the  effects  of 
seeding  on  lightning  frequency  and  the  development  of  techniques  for 
observation  and  careful  measurement  of  the  characteristics  of  light- 
ning strokes.  A  portion  of  the  research  during  the  1960's  was  jointly 
sponsored  by  the  Forest  Service  and  the  National  Science  Founda- 
tion.58 Other  participants  in  Skyfire  have  included  the  National 
Weather  Service,  the  National  Park  Service,  the  Bureau  of  Land 
Management,  several  universities,  and  commercial  contractors.  Results 
of  these  experiments  were  encouraging  but  have  not  been  conclusive. 
Field  and  laboratory  experiments  have  shown  the  relationship  of  ice 
crystals  to  the  lightning  process.  Skyfire  field  experiments  seemed  to 
show  about  one-third  fewer  cloud-to-ground  lightning  strokes  for 


54  Bromley.  Edmond.  briefing  on  the  Department  of  Transportation  weather  modification 
program  before  the  Department  of  Commerce  National  Weather  Modification  Advisory 
Board.  May  31.  1977. 

55  Barrows.  J.  S.,  "Preventing  Fire  From  the  Sky."  Yearbook  Separare  No.  3589  (reprinted 
from  the  1968  Yearbook  of  Agriculture),  U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  Washington,  U.S. 
Government  Printing  Office.  1968.  p.  219. 

58  Fuquay,  Donald  M.  and  Robert  G.  Baughman,  "Project  Skyfire  Lightning  Research," 
U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture.  Forest  Service,  final  report  to  National  Science  Foundation, 
Missoula.  Mont.  December  1969.  p.  3. 

57  Barrows,  "Preventing  Fire  From  the  Sky,"  1968.  p.  221. 

58  Fuquay  and  Baughman,  "Project  Skyfire  Lightning  Research,"  1969,  p.  3. 


310 


seeded  clouds.  Later  experiments  were  carried  out  in  Alaska  in  1973  in 
cooperation  with  the  Bureau  of  Land  Management.  While  efforts  in 
Montana  had  been  concentrated  on  the  long  continuing  current  light- 
ning stroke  which  seemed  to  be  the  most  destructive,  results  in  Alaska 
indicated  that  fires  could  be  started  there  with  shorter  strokes  because 
the  ground  cover  was  more  combustible.  Thus,  the  Montana  results 
were  not  transferable.59 

All  field  experiments  in  weather  modification  under  Project  Sky- 
fire  were  terminated  in  1973,  since  they  were  not  considered  to  be  cost- 
effective,  and  work  subsequent  to  that  time  has  been  concentrated  on 
analysis  of  data  from  previous  experiments  and  on  reporting  to  fire 
protection  agencies  on  the  prospects  for  lightning  suppression.  With 
conclusion  of  this  wrap-up  work  during  1977,  the  Forest  Service  pro- 
poses no  further  research  in  weather  modification  in  the  immediate 
future.60 

DEPARTMENT  OF  ENERGY 

Weather  modification  research  in  this  Department  is  concerned  only 
with  inadvertent  changes  to  weather  and  climate  as  a  result  of  man's 
activities  related  to  energy  development  and  consumption.  Reporting 
of  this  research  through  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences  (ICAS)  as  weather  modification  was  begun  with 
fiscal  year  1975  funding  by  the  former  Energy  Research  and  Develop- 
ment Administration  (ERDA),  recognizing  that  a  significant  amount 
of  research  on  inadvertent  modification  of  weather  and  climate  had 
been  part  of  their  agency  effort.61 

Within  the  former  agency's  atmospheric  science  program,  pertinent 
studies  address  atmospheric  chemistry  of  energy  production  pollutants, 
removal  processes,  interactions  with  atmospheric  processes,  radioactive 
properties  of  the  atmosphere,  and  the  effects  of  waste  heat  and  moisture 
from  energy  production.  As  part  of  the  METROMEX  field  studies  in 
the  St.  Louis  area,62  research  on  urban  aerosols  and  precipitation  com- 
position was  conducted  under  ERDA  support  by  the  Illinois  State 
Water  Survey  and  the  Batelle  Pacific  Northern  Laboratories.  The 
ERDA  Divisions  of  Biomedical  and  Environmental  Research  and  of 
Nuclear  Research  and  Applications  developed  a  program  during 
fiscal  year  1976  to  investigate  the  atmospheric  impacts  of  waste  heat 
and  moisture  rejection  from  proposed  energy  centers  containing  both 
nuclear  and  fossil  fuel  generating  units.  The  Biomedical  and  Environ- 
mental Research  Division  is  also  developing  a  program  to  learn  the 
effects  on  atmospheric  processes  in  the  Western  States  resulting  from 


59  Roberts.  Charles  F.,  briefing  on  the  Department  of  Agriculture  weather  modification 
program  before  the  Department  of  Commerce  National  Weather  Modification  Advisory 
Board.  May  31.  1977. 

Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences.  ICAS  20-FY77,  1976.  p.  88. 

61  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77.  1976,  p.  94. 

82  See  earlier  discussion  of  the  weather  modification  activities  of  the  National  Science 
Foundation  for  a  more  complete  account  of  METROMEX,  p.  283ff. 


311 


increased  stack  emissions  and  resuspended  aerosols  during  extraction 
of  coal  and  oil  shale  processing.63 

The  Division  of  Biomedical  and  Environmental  Research  has  also 
established  a  carbon  dioxide  effects  research  program  to  provide  a  na- 
tional focus  for  research  and  assessment  of  the  potential  for  possible 
problems  relating  to  carbon  dioxide  accumulation  rates.  This  compre- 
hensive research  program  is  being  developed  to  determine  the  physical, 
environmental,  and  social  implications  of  inadvertent  weather  and 
climate  modification  resulting  from  increased  carbon  dioxide  in  the 
atmosphere. 64 


63  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  ICAS  20-FY77.  p.  94. 

84  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology,  Interdepart- 
mental Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  ICAS  21-FY78,  1976,  p.  92. 


CHAPTER  6 


REVIEW  OF  RECOMMENDATIONS  FOR  A  NATIONAL 
PROGRAM  IN  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  James  E.  Mielke,  Analyst  in  Marine  and  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy 
Research  Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

A  number  of  major  studies  have  been  undertaken  over  the  past  25 
years  in  an  effort  to  determine  and  review  the  status  of  the  Federal 
role  in  weather  modification.  Eight  of  these  studies  which  resulted  in 
reports  presenting  findings  and  recommendations  for  actions  have  been 
selected  for  review  and  the  recommendations  summarized.  Some  of  the 
studies  were  mandated  by  Congress  through  passage  of  public  laws. 
Others  were  initiated  by  agencies  or  interagency  committees  of  the 
executive  branch,  two  of  these  were  prepared  by  the  National  Academy 
of  Sciences.  One  study  was  conducted  by  the  General  Accounting  Of- 
fice. In  chronological  order,  the  selected  major  reports  containing 
weather  modification  recommendations  are  as  follows: 

1.  U.S.  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,  "Final  Report  of 
the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control,"  Washington,  D.C., 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  December  31, 1957.  In  two  volumes, 
32  and  422  pages. 

2.  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  "Weather  and 
Climate  Modification,"  report  of  the  Special  Commission  on  Weather 
Modification,  Washington,  D.C.,  National  Science  Foundation,  1966, 
NSF  66-7,  79  pages. 

3.  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Research  Council,  Com- 
mittee on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification : 
Problems  and  Prospects,"  publication  No.  1350,  Washington,  D.C., 
1966,  in  two  volumes,  40  and  212  pages. 

4.  Newell,  Homer  E.,  "A  Recommended  National  Program  in 
Weather  Modification,"  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology, 
Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  ICAS  report 
No.  10a,  Washington,  D.C.,  November  1966,  93  pages. 

5.  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  Interdepartmental 
Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "A  National  Program  for  Ac- 
celerating Progress  in  Weather  Modification,"  ICAS  report  No.  15a, 
Washington,  D.C.,  June  1971,  50  pages. 

6.  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  National  Research  Council,  Com- 
mittee on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "Weather  Modification:  Problems 
and  Progress,"  ISBN  0-309-02121-9,  Washington,  D.C.,  1973,  280 
pages. 

7.  Comptroller  General  of  the  United  States,  "Need  for  a  National 
Weather  Modification  Research  Program,"  Report  to  the  Congress, 

(313) 


314 

B-133202,  Washington,  D.C.,  General  Accounting  Office,  August  23, 

1974,  64  pages. 

8.  U.S.  Domestic  Council,  Environmental  Kesources  Committee, 
Subcommittee  on  Climate  Change,  "The  Federal  Hole  in  Weather 
Modification,"  Washington,  D.C.,  1975,  39  pages. 

In  addition  to  the  above  reports,  the  annual  reports  of  the  National 
Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere  (NACOA)  fre- 
quently contain  recommendations  on  weather  modification.  These  rec- 
ommendations are  summarized  and  the  second  annual  NACOA  report 
is  cited  in  particular : 

National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere,  "Second 
Annual  Report  to  the  President  and  Congress,"  Washington,  D.C., 
U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  June  29,  1973,  47  pages. 

Summaries  of  Major  Weather  Modification  Reports 

The  purpose  of  this  section  is  to  trace  the  evolution  of  recommenda- 
tions for  Federal  action  as  expressed  in  a  number  of  major  weather 
modification  reports.  The  reports  summarized  in  this  section  are  not 
intended  to  be  inclusive  of  all  major  weather  modification  studies.  Only 
those  reports  primarily  containing  recommendations  directing  Federal 
activities  have  been  selected.  Other  policy  orientated  reports,  such  as 
some  of  those  sponsored  by  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  are 
available  but,  in  general,  these  are  focused  less  strongly  on  recom- 
mendations for  the  Federal  role.  Quotations  contained  in  the  report 
summaries  of  the  following  sections  are  from  the  respective  report 
under  consideration  in  that  section.1 

FINAL  REPORT  OF  THE  ADVISORY  COMMITTEE  ON  WEATHER  CONTROL 

The  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control  was  established  by 
act  of  Congress  in  1953.  The  Committee  was  directed  to  make  "a  com- 
plete study  and  evaluation  of  public  and  private  experiments  in 
weather  control  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  extent  to  which 
the  United  States  should  experiment  with,  engage  in,  or  regulate 
activities  designed  to  control  weather  conditions."  The  final  report  of 
this  Committee,  submitted  in  1957,  contained  the  following  findings 
and  recommendations : 

(1)  That  encouragement  be  given  for  the  widest  possible  competent  research 
in  meteorology  and  related  fields.  Such  research  should  be  undertaken  by  Govern- 
ment agencies,  universities,  industries,  and  other  organizations. 

(2)  That  the  Government  sponsor  meteorological  research  more  vigorously 
than  at  present.  Adequate  support  is  particularly  needed  to  maintain  continuity 
and  reasonable  stability  for  long-term  projects. 

(3)  That  the  administration  of  Government-sponsored  research  provide  free- 
dom and  latitude  for  choosing  methods  and  goals.  Emphasis  should  be  put  on 
sponsoring  talented  men  as  well  as  their  specific  projects. 

(4)  That  an  agency  be  designated  to  promote  and  support  research  in  the 
needed  fields,  and  to  coordinate  research  projects.  It  should  also  constitute  a 
central  point  for  the  assembly,  evaluation,  and  dissemination  of  information. 
This  agency  should  be  the  National  Science  Foundation. 

(5)  That  whenever  a  research  project  has  the  endorsement  of  the  National 
Science  Foundation  and  requires  facilities  to  achieve  its  purpose,  the  agency 
having  jurisdiction  over  such  facilities  should  provide  them. 


1  See  preceding  list  of  reports  for  complete  references. 


315 


In  addition  the  Committee  recommended  the  initiation  of  a  general 
meteorological  research  program  to  develop  large  numbers  of  highly 
qualified  research  scientists  working  along  the  following  lines : 

(1)  The  effect  of  solar  disturbances  on  weather. 

(2)  The  factors  which  control  our  global  atmospheric  circulation. 

(3)  The  factors  which  govern  the  genesis  and  movement  of  large-scale  storms. 

(4)  The  dynamics  of  cloud  motions. 

(5)  The  processes  of  rain  and  snow  formation,  and  the  relative  importance 
of  the  physical  phenomena  which  govern  these  processes. 

(6)  The  electrification  process  in  clouds,  and  the  role  electricity  plays  in 
meteorological  phenomena. 

(7)  The  natural  sources  of  condensation  and  ice-forming  nuclei,  and  their  role. 

(8)  The  methods,  materials,  and  equipment  employed  in  weather  modification. 

As  a  result  of  these  recommendations,  the  Xational  Science  Founda- 
tion (XSF)  was  directed  by  Public  Law  85-510  of  July  10,  1958,  to 
initiate  and  support  a  program  of  study,  research,  and  evaluation  in 
the  field  of  weather  modification.  The  XSF  established  a  research  pro- 
gram as  directed  and,  in  effect,  served  as  lead  agency  for  weather  modi- 
fication until  1968,  when  this  specific  role  was  removed  from  the  XSF 
by  Public  Law  90-107. 

WEATHER  AND  CLIMATE  MODIFICATION  ;  REPORT  OF  THE  SPECIAL 
COMMISSION  OX  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

In  1964  the  Director  of  the  Xational  Science  Foundation  appointed 
the  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  The  Commission 
was  assigned  to  "fulfill  the  need  of  the  Xational  Science  Foundation 
for  a  review  of  the  state  of  knowledge  on  weather  and  climate  modifi- 
cation, make  recommendations  concerning  future  policies  and  pro- 
grams and  examine  the  adequacy  of  the  Foundation's  program."  The 
Commission's  assignment  included  consideration  of  not  only  the  scien- 
tific aspects  but  also  the  legal,  social  and  political  problems  in  the 
field.  The  Commission's  report  was  released  in  1966. 

In  general  the  report  concluded  that  there  were  four  basic  research 
needs  to  be  met  in  weather  modification : 

1.  Assessment  and  development  of  an  understanding  of  natural  climatic  change. 

2.  Assessment  of  the  extent  and  development  of  the  understanding  of  inad- 
vertent modifications  of  weather  and  climate. 

3.  Improvement  of  the  process  of  weather  prediction. 

4.  Development  of  means  for  deliberate  intervention  in  atmospheric  processes 
for  weather  and  climate  control  and  evaluation  of  their  consequences. 

As  steps  toward  attaining  these  pursuits  the  Commission  recom- 
mended that  the  following  enterprises  be  fostered : 

1.  Examination  of  the  routes,  rates  and  reservoirs  of  water  substance  and 
energy  exchanges  in  all  aspects  of  the  hydrologic  cycle. 

2.  Investigation  by  numerical  laboratory  and  field  experiments  of  the  dynamics 
of  climate  as  a  basic  study  for  weather  modification  technology. 

3.  Advancement  of  weather  prediction  as  a  proof  of  understanding,  including 
support  of  this  effort  by  the  establishment  of  a  global  weather  observation 
network. 

4.  Broadening  of  the  knowledge  of  cloud  physics  and  dynamics  in  the  laboratory 
and  field,  with  attention  to  wave  phenomena  and  an  evaluation  of  electrical 
influences. 

5.  Study  of  the  effects  of  large  scale  surface  modification  by  numerical  and 
laboratory  models  of  the  oceanic  and  atmospheric  general  circulation,  and  of 
practical  means  for  surface  modification  of  the  land  and  sea. 

6.  Study  of  the  radiative  effects  of  changes  in  the  atmospheric  composition 
and  alteration  of  its  transparency  that  urban  growth  and  new  forms  of  indus- 
try transportation  or  land  use  may  evoke. 


316 


With  regard  to  biological  implications  of  weather  modification,  the 
Commission  stated  that  there  should  be  a  strong  effort  to  bring  the 
field  of  biological  forecasting  up  to  a  higher  level  of  usefulness.  In 
order  to  improve  biological  forecasting,  several  approaches  should  be 
brought  to  bear  on  the  problem  including  growth  chamber  simulation, 
computer  modeling,  study  of  the  fine  structure  in  the  fossil  record  of 
the  recent  past,  and  examination  and  monitoring  of  areas  biologically 
and  climatically  analogous  to  the  changed  and  unchanged  situations. 

The  Commission  also  recommended  that  greater  use  be  made  of 
statisticians  in  analyzing  Government-sponsored  research  in  weather 
modification  and  that  statistics  be  given  greater  emphasis  in  related 
academic  programs  for  meteorologists.  In  addition,  there  is  a  need 
to  assess  more  fully  the  social  and  economic  implications  of  weather 
modification  experimentation,  and  all  agencies  engaged  in  weather 
modification  attempts  should  give  attention  to  the  social  implications. 

With  regard  to  the  legal  system,  the  Commission  recommended  that 
the  Federal  Government  be  empowered  by  appropriate  legislation  to : 
(a)  delay  or  halt  all  activities — public  or  private — in  actual  or  poten- 
tial conflict  with  weather  and  climate  modification  programs  of  the 
Federal  Government;  (b)  immunize  Federal  agents,  grantees,  and 
contractors  engaged  in  weather  and  climate  modification  activities 
from  State  and  local  government  interference;  and  (c)  provide  to 
Federal  grantees  and  contractors  indemnification  or  other  protection 
against  liability  to  the  public  for  damages  caused  by  Federal  programs 
of  weather  and  climate  modification. 

In  the  area  of  international  relations,  the  Commission  recommended 
the  enunciation  of  a  national  policy  embodying  two  main  points : 

(1)  that  it  is  the  purpose  of  the  United  States,  with  normal  and  due 
regard  to  its  own  basic  interests,  to  pursue  its  efforts  in  weather  and 
climate  modification  for  peaceful  ends  and  for  the  constructive  im- 
provement of  conditions  of  human  life  throughout  the  world:  and 

(2)  the  United  States,  recognizing  the  interests  and  concerns  of  other 
countries,  welcomes  and  solicits  their  cooperation,  directly  and  through 
international  arrangements,  for  the  achievement  of  that  objective. 

In  light  of  the  above  program,  the  Commission  considered  that 
Federal  funding  for  weather  modification  should  be  increased  sub- 
stantiallv  from  approximately  $7.2  million  in  fiscal  year  1966  to  a 
total  of  $40  million  or  $50  million  per  year  by  1970.  This  would  include 
substantially  increased  support  for  basic  research  and  development  in 
weather  and  climate  modification,  large  field  experiments  of  both  a 
basic  and  an  applied  nature,  and  development  of  a  strong  centralized 
group,  such  as  could  be  provided  by  a  national  laboratory,  to  serve  as 
a  focal  point  for  research  and  development. 

The  Commission  further  determined  that  no  single  agency  in  the 
Federal  Government  has  the  responsibility  for  developing  the  tech- 
nology of  weather  and  climate  modification  and  that  the  need  for  such 
designation  was  becoming  evident.  The  Commission  took  the  position 
that  the  mission  of  developing  and  testing  techniques  for  modifying 
weather  and  climate  should  bo  assigned  to  an  agency  such  as  the  Envi- 
ronmental Science  Services  Administration  (ESS A),  now  part  of  the 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA),  or  to 
a  completely  new  agency  organized  for  the  purpose.  In  addition  the 


317 


National  Science  Foundation  should  continue  and  expand  its  support 
of  research  in  the  atmospheric  sciences,  including  weather  modifica- 
tion. Furthermore,  other  Federal  agencies  should  remain  free  to  con- 
duct and  support  such  research  and  development  as  may  be  required 
in  the  discharge  of  their  missions.  Finally,  the  Commission  recom- 
mended that  the  Office  of  Science  and  Technology  establish  a  mech- 
anism for  resolving  conflicts  between  agencies  with  regard  to  weather 
modification  activities  and  that  an  advisory  committee  on  weather 
modification  be  established  within  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences. 

WEATHER  AND  CLIMATE  MODIFICATION    PROBLEMS  AND  PROSPECTS 

In  November  1963,  the  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences  of  the 
National  Academy  of  Sciences  appointed  a  panel  on  weather  and 
climate  modification  "to  undertake  a  deliberate  and  thoughtful  re- 
view of  the  present  status  and  activities  in  this  field,  and  of  its  potential 
and  limitations  for  the  future."  Volume  I  of  the  panel's  final  report 
contains  a  summary  of  the  status  of  weather  and  climate  modifica- 
tion, suggestions  for  essential  research,  and  recommendations  for  ac- 
tions to  insure  orderly  and  rapid  future  progress.  While  legal,  social, 
and  economic  questions  were  considered  important,  they  were  not 
within  the  area  of  responsibility  of  the  Academy  panel. 

The  panel  concluded  that  the  present  fragmentation  of  effort  in 
weather  modification  research  and  development  is  unusual  for  the 
environmental  sciences  in  that  many  of  the  fragments  were  below 
critical  size  or  quality  needed  for  effective  work,  and  that  major 
responsibility  for  weather  modification  should  be  centered  in  a  single 
agency;  at  the  same  time,  however,  a  degree  of  delegated  responsi- 
bility should  be  maintained  that  will  allow  other  agencies  to  meet 
their  mission  requirements  for  work  in  this  field.  A  sixfold  increase 
in  Federal  support  from  $5  million  in  1965  to  $30  million  in  1970  was 
recommended.  The  panel  considered  a  number  of  possible  administra- 
tive arrangements  for  the  support  of  weather  modification  research 
including  (1)  a  national  laboratory  for  weather  modification;  (2)  a 
lead  agency,  either  existing  or  new,  with  prime  responsibility  for 
weather  modification;  or  (3)  multiagency  sharing  of  mission  respon- 
sibility. However,  the  panel  declined  to  make  a  firm  statement  as  to 
the  most  desirable  administrative  means  of  achieving  the  goals  9et 
out  in  the  report. 

A  number  of  projects  in  precipitation  stimulation  were  recommended 
including:  (1)  Early  establishment  of  several  carefully  designed  seed- 
ing experiments,  planned  in  such  a  way  as  to  permit  assessment  of 
the  seedability  of  a  variety  of  storm  types,  (2)  develop  better  means 
than  are  currently  available  to  evaluate  operational  programs,  and 
(3)  give  immediate  attention  to  careful  monitoring  and  regulation  of 
operational  programs  for  weather  modification. 

Other  field  investigations  were  recommended  including:  (1)  A  com- 
prehensive exploration  of  hurricane  dynamics  leading  to  a  hypothesis 
for  hurricane  modification,  (2)  measurement  of  tropical  convection 
and  other  aspects  of  energy  exchange  in  the  tropics,  (3)  a  comprehen- 
sive investigation  of  hailstorms,  and  (4)  a  study  of  the  water  budgets 
of  a  variety  of  precipitating  storm  types. 


318 


The  specific  research  areas  of  greatest  promise  that  the  panel  rec- 
ommended should  receive  the  highest  priority  were :  (1)  Studies  of  at- 
mospheric water  budgets  and  vapor  transport  over  those  areas  of  the 
United  States  where  the  potential  for  cloud  seeding  is  important.  (2) 
studies  of  boundary-layer  energy  exchange  processes,  (3)  development 
of  theoretical  models  of  condensation  and  precipitation,  and  (4)  stud- 
ies of  the  meteorological  effects  of  atmospheric  pollution,  including 
carbon  dioxide  and  urbanization. 

The  need  for  enhancement  or  establishment  of  certain  support  sys- 
tems and  research  facilities  was  also  noted.  In  particular  the  panel 
noted  that  the  best  computer  just  then  becoming  available  had  only 
one-fiftieth  of  the  effective  speed  needed  to  meet  the  growing  compu- 
tational requirements  of  meteorological  research,  and,  consequently, 
the  panel  recommended  that  all  necessary  steps  be  taken  to  encourage 
the  computer  industry  to  respond  to  these  requirements.  In  addition, 
the  panel  recommended  that  civil  research  aircraft  facilities  be  en- 
larged to  include  diversified  types  of  aircraft  and  supporting  data- 
gathering  systems  to  meet  the  requirements  placed  upon  them  by  large 
field  research  programs  in  atmospheric  sciences  and  weather  modifica- 
tion. 

The  panel  also  recommended  that  full  U.S.  support  and  leadership 
be  given  in  establishing  an  advanced  global-observational  system,  and 
that  the  Federal  agency  assigned  major  administrative  responsibili- 
ties in  weather  and  climate  modification  also  be  empowered  to  deal  with 
the  complex  international  issues  arising  from  weather  modification 
projects. 

A  RECOMMENDED  NATIONAL  PROGRAM  IN  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

ICAS  (Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences) 
report  No.  10a  was  prepared  by  Dr.  Homer  E.  Xewell  in  response  to  a 
request  to  formulate  a  national  weather  modification  program  along 
the  lines  delineated  in  the  report  of  the  ICAS  Select  Panel  on  Weather 
Modification  titled  '"President  and  Future  Plans  of  Federal  Agencies 
in  Weather-Climate  Modification-'  (included  as  app.  Ill  in  ICAS 
Rept.  Xo.  10a).  The  weather  modification  program  developed  was 
based  on  analysis  of  existing  agency  programs  and  needed  expansion 
of  activities  including  budget  support.  The  following  principles  were 
amon<r  those  developed  which  underlie  the  program  recommendations : 

1.  There  is  sufficient  potential  payoff  indicated  by  the  results  of  past 
research  to  justify  continuing  basic  and  applied  research  in  the  area  of 
weather  modification. 

2.  The  potential  dollar  savings  in  lessening  the  destructive  effects  of 
weather,  and  the  potential  gains  in  enhancing  the  beneficial  effects, 
are  so  great  that  expenditures  of  appreciable  dollars  on  weather  modi- 
fication research  and  application  can  be  justified. 

3.  There  is  a  need  for  a  single  agency  to  assume  responsibility  for 
taking  the  lead  in  developing  a  well-rounded  national  program  of  re- 
search on  weather  modification. 

4.  It  is  desirable  to  maintain  a  multiple-agency  approach  to  weather 
modification,  and  each  agency's  basic  mission  should  determine  its  role 
in  weather  modification,  but  not  to  the  exclusion  of  basic  research. 

5.  Interagency  cooperation  and  support  is  essential. 


319 


6.  A  formal  procedure  must  be  developed  to  achieve  continuing  visi- 
bility and  coordination  of  the  total  weather  modification  program. 

7.  There  must  be  regulation  and  control  of  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities, especially  as  these  become  of  greater  magnitude  and  interna- 
tional in  scope. 

ICAS  report  10a  recommended  that  the  major  thrust  of  the  national 
program  in  weather  modification  for  the  immediate  future  be  in  the 
direction  of  understanding  the  physics  and  dynamics  of  weather  sys- 
tems to  provide  a  sound  basis  for  experimentation  in,  and  application 
of,  weather  modification.  The  report  also  found  that  the  budget  figures 
and  program  expansion  plans  developed  by  the  ICAS  select  panel  to 
be  about  twice  as  high  as  might  be  realistic.  (The  ICAS  select  panel 
had  envisioned  growth  in  Federal  funding  for  weather  modification 
programs  from  $9.3  million  in  1967  to  $146.8  million  in  1970.) 

Report  10a  recommended  that  weather  modification  be  coordinated 
(in  the  sense  of  providing  all  concerned  with  a  continuing  visibility 
of  the  whole  national  weather  modification  effort)  by  the  Office  of  the 
Federal  Coordinator  for  Meteorological  Services  and  Supporting  Re- 
search. However,  it  was  not  intended  to  give  the  Federal  Coordinator 
responsibility  for  program  planning  and  control,  which  would  remain 
the  responsibility  of  the  operating  agencies  and  under  the  review  of 
ICAS.  A  body  for  regulating  weather  modification  activities  was 
deemed  necessary,  but  no  recommendation  was  made  as  to  a  specific 
organization.  The  view  was  expressed  that  it  should  not  be  one  of  the 
operating  agencies  participating  in  the  national  weather  modification 
program,  nor  should  it  be  the  Office  of  the  Federal  Coordinator  be- 
cause of  the  ambivalent  relationship  existing  between  that  office  and 
■ESSA.  In  addition,  ICAS  would  not  have  the  means  to  perform  the 
regulatory  function. 

The  report  recognized  that  international  impacts  may  arise  through 
weather  modification  activities  and  suggested  that  a  practical  and  con- 
structive approach  to  reducing  possible  conflicts  would  be  through  bi- 
lateral or  multilateral  agreements.  In  these,  the  United  States  should 
seek  to  establish  mutual  interest  in  large-scale  experiments. 

The  report  concentrated  on  four  agencies — the  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, ESSA  (now  part  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric 
Administration),  the  Interior  Department's  Bureau  of  Reclamation, 
and  the  National  Science  Foundation  (NSF) — which  together  would 
represent  over  98  percent  of  the  total  national  weather  modification 
activity  in  1970. 

With  regard  to  the  program  developed  for  the  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, there  were  two  major  categories:  (1)  Direct  modification  of 
weather,  and  (2)  ecological  and  supporting  research.  These  relate  pri- 
marily to  the  suppression  of  specific  harmful  effects  of  weather  phe- 
nomena, and  a  study  of  the  effects  of  weather  modification  upon  farm 
and  forest  crops,  and  on  land  management  in  general. 

The  single  objective  of  the  Department  of  Interior's  atmospheric 
water  resources  program  was  to  ascertain  the  technical  and  economic 
feasibility  of  increasing  the  water  supply  for  Bureau  of  Reclamation 
projects  through  weather  modification.  Research  results  showed  suffi- 
cient promise  that  the  ICAS  report  recommended  the  program  should 
be  reoriented  to  reflect  the  eventual  goal  of  the  effective,  beneficial 
utilization  of  the  Nation's  atmospheric  water  resources. 


320 


The  report  recommended  that  ESSA  pursue  a  broad  research  and 
development  effort  which  is  essential  to  a  viable  national  weather 
modification  program,  supplementing  and  integrating  the  research 
programs  of  the  mission-orientated  agencies.  In  particular,  the  ESSA 
program  should  focus  on  such  areas  as  severe  storm  suppression,  hur- 
ricane modification,  and  large-scale  atmospheric  modeling. 

The  ICAS  report  supported  the  proposition  that  NSF  should  in- 
crease the  support  of  basic  and  closely  associated  applied  research, 
which  is  appropriate  and  fundamental  to  any  program  of  weather 
modification.  The  NSF  program  should  be  directed  toward  three  ob- 
jectives: (1)  The  establishment  of  a  sound  scientific  foundation  for 
an  intensified  program  of  weather  modification,  (2)  the  substantial  in- 
volvement of  universities  in  this  area  of  research,  and  (3)  the  produc- 
tion of  substantial  numbers  of  highly  trained  people  for  this  work. 

A  NATIONAL  PROGRAM  FOR  ACCELERATING  PROGRESS  IN 
WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

ICAS  report  No.  15a,  prepared  in  1971,  proposed  a  program  for  ac- 
celerating national  progress  in  the  modification  of  weather  through 
consolidation  of  a  number  of  prime  Government  weather  modification 
efforts  into  seven  key  projects.  A  lead  agency  was  designated  for  each 
of  the  proposed  national  projects.  The  national  projects  were  defined 
as  multiagency  efforts  of  major  national  significance,  which  were  con- 
sidered to  have  near-term  potential  for  meeting  identified  national 
needs.  Each  had  as  a  base  an  ongoing  weather  modification  program 
with  a  potential  for  making  a  vital  contribution  to  the  solution  of  a 
national  problem. 

The  national  projects  were  designed  to  learn  about  physical  mecha- 
nisms and  to  test  scientific  concepts,  except  for  one  with  the  special 
designation  of  pilot  project.  The  pilot  project  was  concerned  with  the 
development  of  efficient  operational  techniques  and  the  process  of  de- 
cisionmaking. These  national  projects  were  designed  so  that  different 
departments  with  differing  missions  would  advance  their  own  as  well 
as  broader  national  interests  by  formal  collaboration  with  one  another. 

The  proposed  national  projects  and  lead  agencies  were: 

1.  National  Colorado  River  Basin  pilot  project,  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion, to  test  the  feasibility  of  applying  a  cloud-seeding  technology, 
proven  effective  under  certain  conditions,  to  a  river  basin  for  a  winter 
season  to  augment  the  seasonal  snowpack. 

2.  National  hurricane  modification  project,  National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration,  to  develop  a  seeding  technology  and  as- 
sociated mathematical  models  to  reduce  the  maximum  surface  winds 
associated  with  hurricanes. 

3.  National  lightning  suppression  project,  Forest  Service,  to  develop 
a  seeding  technology  and  associated  physical  and  mathematical 
models  to  reduce  the  frequency  of  forest  fire-starting  lightning  strokes 
from  cumulonimbus  clouds. 

4.  National  cumulus  modification  project,  National  Oceanic  and  At- 
mospheric Administration,  to  develop  a  seeding  technology  and  as- 
sociated mathematical  models  to  promote  the  growth  of  cumulus 
clouds  in  order  to  increase  the  resulting  natural  rainfall  in  areas  where 
needed. 


321 


5.  National  hail  research  experiment,  National  Science  Foundation, 
to  develop  a  seeding  technology  and  associated  mathematical  models 
to  reduce  the  incidence  of  damaging  hailfall  from  cumulonimbus 
clouds  without  adversely  affecting  the  associated  rainfall. 

6.  National  Great  Lakes  snow  redistribution  project,  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  to  develop  a  seeding  tech- 
nology and  associated  mathematical  models  to  spread  the  heavy  snow- 
fall of  the  Great  Lakes  coastal  region  farther  inland. 

7.  National  fog  modification  project,  Federal  Aviation  Administra- 
tion, to  develop  seeding  or  other  technology  and  associated  physical 
and  mathematical  models  to  improve  the  visibility  in  warm  and  cold 
fogs  where  and  to  the  extent  needed. 

In  addition  to  the  special  support  needed  for  these  national  projects, 
a  significant  increase  in  relevant  broad  background  research  and  de- 
velopment support  would  be  needed.  In  this  regard,  the  areas  of  nuclei 
counting  and  efficiency  assessment,  the  physical  chemistry  of  nucleat- 
ing agents,  the  microphysics  and  dynamics  of  mesoscale  systems,  meso- 
scale  mathematical  models,  and  cloud  physics  instrumentation,  such  as 
doppler  radars  and  microwave  sensors,  were  singled  out  in  particular. 

Specific  recommendations  were  also  made  to  establish  a  national  de- 
pository for  weather  modification  data,  for  the  study  of  and  effective 
handling  of  the  socioeconomic  legal  aspects  for  the  future,  and  for 
certain  ecological  and  hydrological  studies  to  be  performed. 

WEATHER  AND  CLIMATE  MODIFICATIONS  :  PROBLEMS  AND  PROGRESS 

In  1973  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences  (NAS)  published  a 
second  report  on  weather  and  climate  modification  which  reviewed 
progress  since  the  1966  report  and  made  further  recommendations  for 
a  Federal  program.  Three  definite  research  goals  were  recommended 
to  form  the  principal  objective  of  the  Nation's  weather  modification 
program : 

1.  Identification  by  the  year  1980  of  the  conditions  under  which  precipitation 
can  be  increased,  decreased,  and  redistributed  in  various  climatological  areas 
through  the  addition  of  artificial  ice  and  condensation  nuclei ; 

£.  Development  in  the  next  decade  of  technology  directed  toward  mitigating 
the  effects  of  the  following  weather  hazards :  hurricanes,  hailstorms,  fogs,  and 
lighting ; 

3.  Establishment  of  a  coordinated  national  and  international  system  for  in- 
vestigating the  inadvertent  effects  of  manmade  pollutants,  with  a  target  date 
of  1980  for  the  determination  of  the  extent,  trend,  and  magnitude  of  the  effect 
of  various  crucial  pollutants  on  local  weather  conditions  and  on  the  climate  of 
the  world. 

A  program  to  achieve  these  goals  would  contain  many  elements.  In 
this  regard,  several  recommendations  were  presented  in  the  NAS  re- 
port. These  included : 

1.  More  adequate  laboratory  and  experimental  field  programs  would 
be  needed  to  study  the  microphysical  processes  associated  with  the  de- 
velopment of  clouds,  precipitation,  and  thunderstorm  electrification. 

2.  There  was  a  need  to  develop  numerical  models  to  describe  the  be- 
havior of  cloud  systems.  Existing  work  had  dealt  mainly  with  isolated 
cumulus  clouds. 

3.  A  need  was  identified  for  the  standardization  of  instrumentation 
in  seeding  devices  and  the  testing  of  new  seeding  agents. 


322 


4.  There  should  be  established  a  number  of  weather  modification 
statistical  research  groups  associated  with  the  major  held  groups  con- 
cerned with  weather  modification  and  the  inadvertent  effects  of  pol- 
lutants. 

5.  NOAA  should  create  a  repository  for  data  on  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  and,  at  a  suitable  price,  make  available  for  reanalysis 
complete  data  on  these  activities. 

6.  A  continuing  need  was  identified  for  a  comprehensive  series  of 
randomized  experiments  to  determine  the  effects  of  both  artificial  and 
natural  ice  and  cloud  condensation  nuclei  on  precipitation  in  the  prin- 
cipal meteorological  regimes  of  the  United  States. 

7.  Further  investigations  into  the  feasibility  of  redistributing  win- 
ter precipitation  were  needed. 

8.  Evaluation  of  the  effects  of  seeding  on  precipitation  outside  the 
area  of  seeding  was  needed. 

9.  Studies  of  the  effects  of  artificial  seeding  on  cumulus  clouds  and 
the  numerical  modeling  of  the  seeding  process  should  be  continued 
and  expanded. 

10.  Investigations  should  be  made  to  determine  whether  the  seeding 
techniques  presently  used  in  the  study  of  isolated  cumulus  clouds  and 
in  hurricane  modification  can  be  extended  to  the  amelioration  of  severe 
thunderstorms,  hailstorms,  and  even  tornadoes. 

11.  An  expanded  program  was  needed  to  provide  continuous  forma- 
tion-to-decay observations  of  hurricanes  from  above,  around,  within, 
and  beneath  seeded  and  nonseeded  hurricanes  and  for  testing  new 
techniques  for  reducing  hurricane  intensities. 

12.  A  major  national  effort  in  fundamental  research  on  hailstorms 
and  hailstorm  modification  should  be  pursued  aggressively. 

13.  A  research  program  dealing  with  fog  dissipation  should  be  un- 
dertaken. 

14.  There  was  a  need  to  develop  a  variety  of  research  techniques  for 
observing  severe  storms. 

15.  National  and  international  programs  should  be  developed  for 
monitoring  atmospheric  changes  and  pollutants  resulting  from  man's 
activities. 

16.  Satellite  programs  should  be  developed  to  monitor  on  a  global 
basis,  the  cloud  cover,  albedo,  and  the  heat  balance  of  the  atmosphere. 

17.  Enlarged  programs  were  needed  to  measure  climatic  differences 
between  cities  and  adjoining  countrysides  and  to  determine  the 
mechanisms  responsible. 

18.  Continued  strong  support  should  be  provided  for  the  global 
atmospheric  research  program  now  underway  to  model  properly  the 
global  atmosphere-ocean  system. 

The  XAS  report  recognized  that  three  major  functions  must  be 
provided  within  the  Federal  organizational  structure  to  achieve  these 
goals.  First,  at  this  stage  in  the  development  of  the  field,  there  must 
be  support  for  many  basic  studies  at  universities  in  the  relevant  aspects 
of  the  atmospheric  sciences,  biological  sciences,  social  sciences,  engi- 
neering, and  public  policy.  Second,  the  mission  oriented  agencies  must 
maintain  their  weather  modification  programs.  Finally,  an  agency 
that  lias  the  scientific  and  management  competence,  the  dedication, 
and  the  resources  to  make  the  national  weather  modification  program 
part  of  its  basic  mission  needs  to  be  designated;  the  absence  of  an 


323 


agency  with  this  ability  and  role  has  been  the  reason  that  progress 
has  not  been  more  rapid.  The  report  went  on  to  recommend  that  the 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA)  be 
assigned  principal  administrative  responsibility  for  a  national  pro- 
gram in  weather  modification.  Several  considerations  were  presented 
in  support  of  this  recommendation. 

The  NAS  report  also  suggested  that  it  is  unlikely  that  the  current 
ad  hoc  method  of  carrying  out  large  field  programs  would  be  satis- 
factory over  the  long  term  and  that  a  national  laboratory  should  be 
assigned  primary  responsibility  for  carrying  out  large  weather  modifi- 
cation experiments  involving  theoretical,  laboratory,  and  field  pro- 
grams. This  laboratory  would  have  the  advantage  of  being  of  sufficient 
size  to  comprise  the  "critical  mass"  needed  to  mount  a  meaningful  and 
effective  research  and  development  program  directed  specifically  to- 
ward weather  modification. 

In  addition,  the  NAS  report  recommended  that  the  newly  created 
National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere  (NACOA) 
undertake  a  major  study  of  the  public  policy  issues  of  weather  modifi- 
cation and  of  the  Federal  organization  and  legislation  necessary. 
While  the  report  did  not  present  a  detailed  budget  for  the  various 
program  elements,  it  estimated  that  no  less  than  $50  million  per  year 
would  be  needed.  This  would  have  required  at  least  a  doubling  of  cur- 
rent efforts  at  the  time. 

ANNUAL  REPORTS  TO  THE  PRESIDENT  AND  CONGRESS  BY  NACOA 

The  first  annual  report  of  the  National  Advisory  Committee  on 
Oceans  and  Atmosphere  in  1972  discusses  the  background  and  present 
state-of-the-art  in  weather  modification  and  recommended  action  it 
believed  desirable  in :  "legislation  to  define  rights,  responsibilities,  and 
a  sense  of  purpose;  research  to  hasten  and  extend  our  abilities  to  re- 
duce risks;  and. international  agreement  to  promote  peaceful  uses  of 
weather  modification  and  to  eschew  its  hostile  uses."  This  report  also 
found  that  a  central  focus  was  lacking  in  Federal  weather  modification 
activities  and  suggested  that  NOAA  might  be  the  appropriate  agency 
for  the  lead  role. 

The  second  annual  NACOA  report  (1973)  repeated  the  basic 
weather  modification  findings  of  the  previous  year,  only  this  time  high- 
lighted them  more  clearly  in  the  form  of  recommendations.  The  report 
recommended  that :  "The  many  small  programs  in  weather  modifica- 
tion now  scattered  widely  through  the  Federal  agencies  be  focused 
and  coordinated  under  NOAA's  lead ;  basic  cloud  physics  and  dynam- 
ics be  given  higher  priority;  and  that  the  legal,  social,  and  economic 
impact  of  weather  modification  be  thoroughly  examined  and  appro- 
priate regulatory  and  licensing  legislation  be  sought." 

NACOA's  third  annual  report  again  put  forward  the  weather  modi- 
fication recommendations  of  the  previous  years,  calling  for  designa- 
tion of  NOAA  as  lead  agency,  greater  research  emphasis  on  the  phys- 
ics of  cloud  formation  and  rainfall  augmentation,  and  examination 
of  legislative  and  public  policy  issues  including  U.S.  initiatives  to 
establish  international  agreement  to  insure  that  weather  modification 
efforts  are  devoted  to  mutually  beneficial  purposes. 


324 


The  fourth  annual  NACOA  report  (1975)  amplified  the  previous 
weather  modification  recommendations  and  added  a  recommendation 
that  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  in  conjunction  with  NOAA,  de- 
velop a  crop  assessment  and  planning  system  which  will  recognize  the 
national  implications  of  simultaneous  climatic  variation  upon  agricul- 
tural production  worldwide. 

In  1976  NACOA  reported  that  the  fragmented  Federal  effort  in 
weather  modification  placed  too  much  emphasis  on  operations,  with 
insufficient  attention  to  the  basic  research  which  is  needed  to  make 
weather  modification  a  reliable  operational  tool.  Finding  that  enough 
studies  have  been  conducted  to  permit  a  decision  as  to  how  to  proceed, 
NACOA  recommended  that  action  be  taken  now,  by  the  executive 
branch  or  by  the  Congress  to  give  NOAA  the  responsibility  for  coor- 
dinating and  managing  a  coherent  Federal  program  of  weather  modi- 
fication research  and  experimentation. 

Subsequent  to  passage  of  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy 
Act  of  1976  (P.L.  94-490)  the  sixth  annual  NACOA  report  in  1977 
did  not  include  recommendations  specific  to  weather  modification. 
However,  the  report  stated  that  "NACOA  has  repeatedly  urged  a 
coordinated  Federal  effort  to  support  the  basic  research  needed  to 
bring  weather  modification  to  the  point  of  being  an  operational  tool 
resting  on  a  sound  technical  base.  *  *  *  Major  gaps  remain — largely 
because  no  one  agency  has  the  responsibility  for  identifying  and  sup- 
porting those  areas  of  basic  study  needed  for  further  progress  along 
a  broad  front." 

Public  Law  94-490  directed  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  conduct  a 
1-year  study  and  on  the  basis  of  this  to  recommend  to  the  President 
and  to  the  Congress  a  national  policy  on  weather  modification,  a  Fed- 
eral program  to  implement  this  policy,  and  organizational  and  legisla- 
tive actions  needed  to  put  this  program  into  effect.  Because  of  adminis- 
trative delays  this  study,  being  conducted  by  the  17-member  weather 
modification  advisory  board  appointed  in  1977,  was  not  completed 
within  the  year  specified  by  the  act,  but  will  be  completed  during  1978. 

NEED   FOR   A     NATIONAL    WEATHER    MODIFICATION    RESEARCH  PROGRAM 

Because  of  the  multiagency  participation  and  the  increased  Federal 
funding,  in  1974  the  General  Accounting  Office  (GAO)  undertook  a 
review  of  the  administration  of  weather  modification  research.  The 
GAO  report  found  that  several  administrative  problems  existed  which 
had  been  identified  by  previous  studies  during  the  past  decade.  These 
problems  were  :  (1)  No  central  authority  to  direct  Federal  departments 
efforts,  (2)  ineffective  coordination,  and  (3)  insufficient  resources  to 
achieve  timely,  effective  results.  Although  most  previous  studies  pro- 
posed the  formation  of  a  national  program  for  weather  modification, 
previous  recommendations  that  a  single  agency  be  responsible  for 
developing  a  national  weather  modification  program  had  not  been 
implemented. 

The  GAO  report  also  examined  the  ongoing  national  hail  research 
experiment  which  was  planned  as  a  coordinated  effort  with  the  Na- 
tional Science  Foundation  as  lead  agency.  GAO  found  "even  though 
the  experiment  was  well  planned,  requiring  extensive  interagency 


325 


participation,  in  comparing  planned  efforts  with  actual  efforts  that, 
for  the  most  part,  agencies  could  not  and  did  not  meet  all  their 
obligations." 

Consequently,  the  GAO  report  recommended  that  "the  Office  of 
Management  and  Budget  should,  in  cooperation  with  the  Federal  de- 
partments and  agencies  involved  in  weather  modification  research :  (1) 
Develop  a  national  program  with  goals,  objectives,  priorities,  and 
milestones,  designating  one  of  the  agencies,  which  would  have  a  major 
program  responsibility,  to  administer  and  maintain  the  national  pro- 
gram; (2)  develop  a  plan  to  define  and  reassign,  if  appropriate,  the 
responsibilities  of  Federal  departments  and  agencies  providing  sup- 
port or  conducting  weather  modification  research;  and  (3)  develop  a 
plan  to  allocate  resources  to  the  national  program  elements.  The  GAO 
report  went  on  to  state  that  while  proposed  legislation  to  establish 
a  Department  of  Natural  Resources  would  transfer  three  agencies' 
weather  modification  activities  to  the  proposed  department,  in  GAO's 
opinion,  problems  of  administration  and  management  would  continue 
because  weather  modification  activities  would  still  be  fragmented. 

THE  FEDERAL  ROLE  IN   WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

In  1975  the  Domestic  Council,  Subcommittee  on  Climatic  Change, 
published  a  report  containing  findings  and  recommendations  for  the 
Federal  role  in  weather  modification.  The  principal  recommendation 
of  the  report  was  that  a  policy  should  be  adopted  to  develop,  encour- 
age, and  maintain  a  comprehensive  and  coordinated  national  program 
in  weather  modification  research.  The  recommended  Federal  role  was 
divided  into  three  areas ;  research,  operations,  and  regulation. 

Among  the  recommendations  for  research,  the  report  stated  that  the 
Federal  Government  should  recognize  weather  modification  as  having 
significant  potential  for  ameliorating  important  weather  related  prob- 
lems and  foster  a  broad-based  effort  to  research  and  experimentation  in 
weather  modification  during  the  next  decade.  The  Domestic  Council 
report  offered  two  options  for  carrying  out  this  Federal  research  role : 
(1)  Continued  coordination  and  planning  through  ICAS,  with  each 
agency  following  its  mission-directed  role,  and  (2)  establishing  a  lead 
agency.  An  appendix  to  the  report  stated  that  the  Departments  of 
Commerce,  State,  and  Transportation  and  the  National  Aeronautics 
and  Space  Administration  subscribe  to  the  lead  agency  option  and  rec- 
ommend that  XOAA  be  assigned  this  lead  agency  responsibility. 

Other  research  recommendations  included:  (1)  Increased  funding 
for  weather  modification;  (2)  a  more  vigorous  research  program  in 
basic  cloud  physics;  (3)  greater  emphasis  on  assessment,  of  socioeco- 
nomic and  environmental  impacts  of  weather  modification ;  and,  (4) 
greater  emphasis  on  developing  improved  methodologies  to  evaluate 
the  effects  of  weather  modification. 

These  recommendations  were  based  on  findings  that  the  present 
strategy  for  Federal  research  in  weather  modification  has  largely  been 
mission  orientated,  which  does  not  allow  development  of  weather  mod- 
ification as  a  broad  based  national  goal.  Furthermore,  although  some 
progress  has  been  made  over  the  past  two  decades,  the  scientific  and 


326 


technological  complexity  of  even  modest  weather  modification  experi- 
ments requires  greater  staffing  and  funding  than  has  generally  been 
available. 

The  report  went  on  to  note  that  few  operational  weather  modifica- 
tion techniques  have  been  thoroughly  proven,  although  several  are  suf- 
ficiently close  to  the  stage  when  they  could  become  operational.  Con- 
sequently, the  Domestic  Council  report  made  several  recommendations 
for  the  Federal  versus  State  and  private  roles  regarding  weather  mod- 
ification operations.  The  report  stated  that  the  Federal  Government 
should  reserve  for  itself  responsibility  for:  (1)  precipitation  modifica- 
tion related  to  multiple  State  water  resources  or  Federal  projects,  (2) 
weather  modification  over  airports  or  related  facilities,  (3)  mitigation 
of  large-scale  drought,  and  (4)  mitigation  of  hurricanes  or  extensive 
storm  systems. 

The  States  and  private  sector  should  be  encouraged  to  conduct 
weather  modification  operations  in  all  other  areas.  The  Council  recom- 
mended that  the  private  sector  be  utilized  to  conduct  Federal  weather 
modification  operations  where  feasible  or  desirable. 

In  the  area  of  regulation,  the  Council  report  found  that  additional 
Federal  regulatory  legislation  was  not  needed  at  that  time  as  present 
reporting  procedures  were  adequate.  However,  given  the  importance 
and  expected  development  of  the  field,  continued  examination  of  the 
need  for  Federal  regulation  and  international  treaties  to  govern' 
weather  modification  activities  would  be  prudent.  In  response  to  that 
finding,  the  Domestic  Council  report  recommended  that  a  formal  pro- 
cedure be  established  to  periodically  review  regulatory  needs.  In  addi- 
tion, the  report  recommended  that  future  U.S.  domestic  and  foreign 
weather  modification  activities  should  include  prior  assessment  of  the 
potential  international  implications. 

Trends  and  Analysis 

In  the  studies  and  reports  reviewed,  a  number  of  problems  hindering 
progress  in  weather  modification  have  been  identified  and  recom- 
mendations have  been  made  to  resolve  these  problems.  Two  areas  of 
concern  generally  arose:  (1)  Federal  organization  or  administration 
of  weather  modification  research  and  (2)  specific  program  elements  or 
research  needs.  The  recommendations  are  listed  in  table  1  in  the  form 
of  a  matrix  in  which  the  recommendations  are  related  to  the  reports 
in  which  they  are  found.  This  format  facilitates  recognition  of  trends 
such  as  recommendations  made  in  early  reports  which  are  still  being 
made  or,  in  some  cases,  may  have  been  acted  upon.  Administrative 
recommendations  are  grouped  first. 


327 


TO  >, 
C  C 

4^2 

< 


gig 


*i2 


5e- 


£X  X      XX      X  XX 


XX 


XX 


XX 


xx  :x 


xx  ;  ;  ;x 


xxxxxxxx 


8x  ;xxx 


XXX  IX 


xxxxxxx  ;xx  :xx 


xxxxxxx 


xxxx 


XX 


XXX  IXXXXXXX 


XX 


2  E 


E3 


co  a> 


,  o  c  E 

o-a  o  i= 
=  c 

S>  «J  WOO 


—  .o  o_  q  co 

*  E 


XX 


•■1  f5 


S  =  "  E£ 
-o      m  £ 

•■=  o  S° 

-C  -Q  C.  CO  CO 

-,  "J*  C  «  CD 
.UJ_.Eo 


■2  m-c-i= 


E.*>  « 


^  cm'  CO* 


u  o 

§.2.8°- 
E  -  °  tr-o 

mi  h  i 

m  o  f  ra  '  m 

•o  <o  m—  >.E  > 
ni«»>,p  O 


X  xxxxxx 


xxxxxx 


x  xxxx  :x 


xxx 


X  xxx 


S  5 
o  E 


!  °-S  =  g  g- 

:  o  co  •  °.  tt  05 
=  *5-S» 
•^3  <=  oe  co  S 
co  :=  a>  c 
=  c  -  2  « 
5  =  »15  £? 
a>-o  to  =  —  - 
eo  ® 

>  <«  et.fS  o 
o  w  —  3 
*-  «tj-£ts 
<=l     a>  <2  c 

iri  CO  P>."  00  CD*  O  *-i  CNJ  co'  'S-'  IT)  CD  r-I  oo*  a>"  o  <-I 


xxx 


SOW. 


CO  (O 

|-=  =  s 

O  CO  CD  E 

=  «  "  ^ 


'  S—         co  co  .£ 
2  o  £  £.2 
'  Xn  -*=  *^  "°  co  co  > 

[•■5  >>><2  ^>->> 

!0M  =  5o  =  =  = 

i  u_  oo  to  o  oo  oo  oo 


■0OCT>CZ>* 


o.5E- 


c  -£S  o 
oca 
E 


■O  Q.' 
CO  «-o 
■D  CD  CO 


E  !2  o  co 
E  2"."2 

O  00  o  '</> 

o<  8  c 
a>o  c  o 


328 


The  most  common  administrative  recommendation  is  to  designate 
a  lead  agency  to  provide  overall  coordination  of  a  Federal  weather 
modification  program.  Other  than  the  advisory  committee  report,  of 
1957,  which  recommended  NSF  for  this  role,  the  lead  agency  recom- 
mended was  NOAA  or  its  predecessor  ESSA.  In  the  case  of  the  Do- 
mestic Council's  report,  a  lead  agency  role  was  presented  as  one  of  two 
options,  the  other  being  continued  coordination  through  ICAS,  but  an 
appendix  supported  by  four  agencies  recommended  that  NOAA  be 
designated  the  lead  agency.  The  recommendation  for  a  lead  agency  was 
frequently  coupled  with  the  recommendation  that  mission  oriented 
agencies  support  more  fully  the  national  weather  modification  efforts 
as  they  relate  to  their  particul ar  mission. 

In  some  cases  recommendations  of  an  administrative  nature  have 
been  acted  upon  or  lead  to  a  solution  to  the  problem  along  other  lines. 
For  example,  the  report  of  the  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modi- 
fication in  1966  recommended  that  a  standing  committee  on  weather 
modification  be  established  in  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences.  While 
a  standing  committee  has  not  been  established  in  NAS,  panels  on 
weather  and  climate  modification  have  been  assembled  as  needed  by 
the  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences.  Additionally,  in  1972 
NACOA  was  established  which,  although  not  within  the  National 
Academy,  serves  in  the  role  of  a  standing  advisory  committee.  Another 
recommendation  of  the  special  commission  was  that  the  Office  of 
Science  and  Technology  should  establish  a  mechanism  for  the  coordina- 
tion of  weather  modification  policies  and  programs.  To  some  extent, 
ICAS  has  responsibility  in  this  area,  but  it  lacks  authority  to  initiate 
action  within  any  agency. 

With  regard  to  specific  research  recommendations  or  program  ele- 
ments, some  reports  are  more  general  than  others.  For  example,  the 
special  commission  report  recommended  that  the  Federal  Government 
conduct  large  field  experiments  without  discussing  these  in  detail. 
Subsequent  reports  often  detailed  specific  field  projects. 

Some  perspective  can  be  gained  by  comparing  early  reports  to  more 
recent  ones.  Early  reports  identified  the  limitations  on  numerical 
modeling  imposed  by  the  existing  state-of-the-art  in  computer  tech- 
nology. While  these  limitations  still  exist  to  some  extent,  the  significant 
progress  that  has  occurred  in  this  field  has  served  to  reduce  the  ap- 
parent magnitude  of  the  problem.  Early  reports  also  identified  re- 
search and  numerical  modeling  on  isolated  cumulus  clouds  as  a  primary 
focus  (the  wisdom  of  dealing  with  simpler  problems  before  attacking 
more  complex  ones) ,  but  later  reports  noted  progress  in  this  area  and 
pointed  to  the  need  for  research  and  numerical  modeling  on  a  variety  of 
cloud  systems.  Early  reports  were  also  somewhat  caught  up  in  the  gen- 
eral enthusiasm  for,  and  expectation  of,  being  able  to  modify  the 
weather  on  an  operational  basis  in  the  near  future.  Consequently,  a 
general  feeling  was  that  problems  may  arise  in  the  absence  of  regula- 
tory direction  at  the  Federal  level.  However,  as  progress  in  weather 
modification  was  not  as  rapid  as  expected  (perhaps  as  a  result  of  lower 
levels  of  funding  than  expected  or  perhaps  because  of  unanticipated 
complexities  with  weather  modification  projects),  it  lias  since  become 
apparent  to  many  authorities  that  new  regulatory  measures  are  not 
needed  at  this  time,  In  this  regard,  the  Domestic  Council's  report  rec- 
ommended periodic  review  to  assess  regulatory  needs. 


329 


Almost  invariably  the  reports  pointed  out  that  considerably  greater 
progress  could  be  made  if  funding  were  increased.  Although  funding 
for  weather  modification  activities  has  increased  over  the  years,  most 
recommendations  for  funding  have  been  for  considerably  higher  levels 
than  have  actually  been  provided.2 

2  See  ch.  5  for  funding  data  on  Federal  weather  modification  research  programs.  In  par- 
ticular, fig.  2  shows  the  course  of  Federal  funding  (planning  budgets  and  actual  expendi- 
tures) from  fiscal  year  1966  to  fiscal  year  1978. 


CHAPTER  7 


STATE  AND  LOCAL  ACTIVITIES  IN  WEATHER 
MODIFICATION 

( By  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Overview  of  State  Weather  Modification  Activities 

INTRODUCTION 

A  majority  of  the  States  in  the  United  States  have  some  official 
interest  in  weather  modification.  Twenty-nine  States  have  some  form 
of  law  which  relates  to  such  activities,  usually  concerned  with  the  vari- 
ous facets  of  regulation  or  control  of  operations  within  the  State  and 
sometimes  pertaining  to  authorization  for  funding  research  and/or 
operations  at  the  State  or  local  level.  The  statutes  dealing  with 
weather  modification  for  these  29  States  are  reproduced  in  appendix 
D.  Two  other  States,  Maryland  and  Massachusetts,  had  also  enacted 
legislation  on  the  subject  ;  however,  the  laws  in  these  two  States  have 
since  been  repealed.  The  general  policy  toward  weather  modification 
in  each  State  is  usually  reflected  in  the  weather  modification  law  of 
that  State ;  the  laws  of  some  States  tend  to  encourage  development  and 
use  of  the  technology,  while  others  discourage  such  activities. 

The  current  legal  regime  regulating  weather  modification  has  been 
developed  by  the  States  rather  than  the  Federal  Government,  except 
in  the  areas  of  research  support,  commissioning  studies,  and  requiring 
reporting  of  activities.  The  various  regulatory  management  functions 
which  the  States  perform  are  embodied  in  the  collection  of  State  laws 
on  weather  modification.  These  functions  include  such  activities  as  (1) 
issuance,  renewal,  suspension,  and  revocation  of  licenses  and  permits; 
(2)  monitoring  and  collection  of  information  on  activities  through  re- 
quirements to  maintain  records,  the  submission  of  periodic  activity  re- 
ports, and  the  inspection  of  premises  and  equipment ;  (3)  funding  and 
managing  of  State  or  locally  organized  operational  and/or  research 
programs;  (4)  evaluation  and  advisory  services  to  locally  organized 
public  and  private  operational  programs  within  the  State;  and  (5) 
other  miscellaneous  administrative  activities,  including  the  organiza- 
tion and  operation  of  State  agencies  and  boards  which  are  charged 
with  carrying  out  the  statutory  responsibilities. 

Both  the  kinds  of  weather  modification  functions  performed  and 
the  diversity  of  the  functions  performed  by  the  several  States  can  be 
gleaned  from  table  1.  in  which  are  identified  the  chief  elements  of  the 
weather  modification  laws  for  the  respective  States  having  such  laws. 
(The  information  in  the  table  was  provided  by  Davis  and  reflects  the 


(331) 


332 

content  of  State  laws  in  force  at  the  end  of  1975. )  1  Hawaii's  law  merely 
mentions  atmospheric  waters  and  is  not  included  in  the  table. 

In  order  to  administer  the  various  regulatory  and  managerial  respon- 
sibilities pertaining  to  weather  modification  within  the  States,  an  as- 
sortment of  institutional  structures  has  been  established.  These  include 
State  departments  of  water  or  natural  resources,  commissions,  and 
special  governing  or  advisory  boards.  Often  there  is  a  combination  of 
two  or  more  of  these  types  of  agencies  or  groups,  separating  the  respon- 
sibility functions  of  pure  administration  from  those  of  appeals,  permit- 
ting, or  advisory  services.  In  the  cases  of  particular  State  activities  con- 
tained in  the  latter  part  of  this  chapter,  some  examples  of  State  institu- 
tional structure  for  weather  modification  are  discussed.2 

TABLE  1.— ELEMENTS  OF  STATE  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  LAWS  IN  FORCE  AS  OF  THE  END   OF  1975' 


Administra-  Records  Water 

State  tive  Funding      Licensing     Permit        and  report      rights  Liability 

Arizona   X   

California   X  X 

Colorado   X  X 

Connecticut  X  X 

Florida    X  X 

Idaho.   X  X 

Illinois    X   

Iowa,..     X 

Kansas   X  X 

Louisiana   X   

Minnesota.    X 

Montana   X  X 

Nebraska   X  X 

Nevada    X  X 

New  Hampshire   X 

New  Mexico   X 

New  York   X    -   X 

North  Dakota   X  X  X  X  X  X 

Oklahoma...    X  X  X  X  X 


Licensing 

Permit 

and  report  rights 

X 

X   

-  X 

X   

X 

X 

X  X 

.  X 

X   

X 

X   

.  X 

X 

X    

X 
X 

X 
X 

X             --  - 

X             —  — - 

X 

X 
X 

X   

X 

X 

X   

Oregon   X  X    X  X 

Pennsylvania   X     X  X  X  X 

South  Dakota   X  X              X  X  X   

Texas    X  X             X  X  X  X  X 

Utah   X  X             X  X  X  X  X 

Washington   X  X             X  X  X   

We  t  Virg  nia    X    -   X  X  -  X 

Wisconsin   X     X  X   

Wyoming    X  X    X  X    


1  From  Davis.  Testimony  in  hearings.  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment 
and  the  Atmosphere.  June  1976. 

It  is  clear  that  the  State  weather  modification  laws  and  their  at- 
tendant administration  are  concerned  especially  in  a  variety  of  ways 
with  the  regulation  or  control  of  activities  within  the  State.  This  reg- 
ulation often  includes  licensing  and/or  the  granting  of  permits,  and 
it  may  also  include  monitoring,  evaluation,  and  reporting  of  opera- 
tions/The various  means  by  which  weather  modification  is  controlled 
are  discussed  in  some  detail  in  a  section  of  the  chapter  of  this  report 
on  legal  aspects.3  Specific  laws  of  the  States,  found  in  full  in  appen- 
dix D  are  also  summarized  in  table  1  of  that  appendix,  where  they  are 
compared  in  terms  of  their  being  reasonably  comprehensive,  their  pro- 
viding for  licensing  only,  or  their  containing  some  other  miscellane- 
ous provision.4 

1  Davis.  Ray  J.,  testimony  in  :  U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives.  Committee  on 
Soienrp  and  Technology,  Snbcommittpe  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  "Weather 
Modification,"  hearings,  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  on  H.R.  10039  and  S.  3383,  June  15-18,  1976. 
Washington.  D.C.,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1976,  pp.  250-252. 

2  See  p.  351  ff. 

3  See  ch.  11.  p.  44!)  ff. 
*  See  p.  514  ff. 


333 


Since  regulation  cannot  be  effective  without  sufficient  information 
about  ongoing  activities,  most  States  which  do  regulate  weather  modi- 
fication provide  authority  which  enables  officials  to  inspect  the  prem- 
ises of  operators  and  to  require  them  to  maintain  daily  logs  and  report 
on  their  activities  regularly.  Daily  reporting  is  not  required,  however, 
by  any  State,  and  copies  of  reports  filed  with  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce are  also  accepted  in  some  cases  as  satisfactory  compliance  with 
reporting  requirements.  If  properly  analyzed  by  responsible  State 
agencies,  the  information  contained  in  these  reports  should  indicate 
apppropriate  changes  or  cessations  to  cloud-seeding  operations,  if  any, 
that  should  be  made  in  the  public  interest.5 

The  extent  of  involvement  in  research  and  operations  varies  consid- 
erably from  State  to  State.  Some  States  support  research  only,  while 
others  fund  and  operate  both  operational  and  research  programs.  In 
some  cases  funding  only  is  provided  to  those  localities,  usually  at  the 
county  level,  which  have  established  operational  programs.  In  other 
States,  counties  and/or  groups  of  individuals  within  local  regions  op- 
erate programs  funded  entirely  by  local  citizens,  but  with  approval 
and/or  advisory  services  from  State  agencies.  The  recent  1976-77 
drought  conditions  led  some  Western  States  to  initiate  emergency 
cloud-seeding  programs  as  one  means  of  augmenting  dwindling  water 
supplies.  Among  such  measures  taken  on  a  short  time  basis  are  the 
emergency  operations  in  California,  Kansas,  and  Washington;  pro- 
grams in  these  States  are  discussed  briefly  in  the  sections  at  the  end  of 
this  chapter  dealing  with  the  cases  of  individual  States. 

Within  many  of  the  States,  particularly  in  the  West,  there  is  a  broad 
range  of  weather  modification  research  activity.  Usually  this  research 
is  performed  by  atmospheric  and  other  scientists  at  the  State  univer- 
sities or  other  State  research  agencies.  Such  research  is  frequently 
funded  through  one  of  the  Federal  agencies  with  major  weather  modi- 
fication research  programs,  such  as  the  National  Science  Foundation 
or  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  or  it  may  be  supported  at  least  in  part 
with  State  funds.  A  few  States  contribute  funds  to  a  Federal  research 
project  which  is  conducted  jointly  with  those  States  partly  within 
their  boundaries.6 


XORTH  AMERICAN  INTERSTATE  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  COUNCIL 

On  J anuary  17, 1975,  the  Xorth  American  Interstate  Weather  Modi- 
fication Council  (XAIWMC)  was  organized  to  coordinate  intrastate, 
interstate,  and  possible  international  weather  modification  activities. 
Its  main  purpose  was  to  achieve  and  maintain  local  and  State  control  of 
such  activities  while  attempting  to  attain  a  high  degree  on  uniformity 
in  legislation  and  an  effective  mechanism  for  information  exchange*7 
The  origin  of  the  XAIWMC  had  its  roots  in  a  conference  in  June  1974, 
in  Sioux  Falls,  S.  Dak.,  to  which  Gov.  Richard  K.  Kneip  of  South  Da- 
kota invited  the  Governors  of  the  United  States.8  The  program  for  this 
Interstate  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  was  developed  at  Gov- 

5  Davis,  testimony  before  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  Subcommittee  on 
the  Environment  and  the  Atmosnhere.  June  1976  hearings.  94th  Cong..  2d  spss..  p  245 

6  See  discussion  of  the  High  Plains  project  (HIPLEX),  under  "Project  Skywater,"  spon- 
sored by  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  c*i.  5.  p.  258  ff. 

7  Xorth  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council :  Its  Purposes  and  Activities 
Las  Cruces.  N.  Mex..  office  of  the  XAIWMC.  September  1976.  Pub.  Xo.  76-2.  p.  1. 

8  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  in  the  United  States:  Potential  and  Problems  for 
Interstate  Action,  State  of  South  Dakota,  Sioux  Falls.  S.  Dak.,  June  10-12,  1974  248  pp 


34-857  O  -  79  -  24 


334 


ernor  Kneip's  direction  by  the  South  Dakota  Weather  Modification 
Commission,  which  was  then  responsible  for  the  operation  of  the  state- 
wide South  Dakota  weather  modification  program.9  Representatives 
of  23  States  and  the  Canadian  Province  of  Alberta  attended  the  con- 
ference and  reported  on  weather  modification  activities  within  their 
States. 

Recognizing  the  need  for  the  prudent  design  and  critical  analysis 
of  all  weather  modification  efforts.  Governor  Kneip  stressed  the  fact 
that  interstate  cooperation  was  "particularly  needed  in  view  of  the 
growing  importance  of  agricultural  production  to  the  economy  and 
well-being  of  the  people  of  all  States  and  the  tendency  to  develop  indi- 
vidual State  weather  modification  programs."  10  At  the  end  of  the 
conference  representatives  were  selected  from  California,  Xew  Mexico, 
North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  Texas,  Washington,  and  the  Province 
of  Alberta  to  serve  on  an  ad  hoc  committee  which  was  to : 

1.  Investigate  possible  organizational  needs ; 

2.  Plan  a  second  conference  on  interstate  weather  modification 
cooperation  and  coordination  within  1  year;  and 

3.  Study  the  Sioux  Falls  conference  working  committee  reports 
and  develop  suggestions  into  recommendations.11 

The  conference  in  June  1974  showed  an  expanding  aAvareness  of  the 
role  of  the  States  in  weather  modification  activities,  so  that  the  main 
mission  of  the  ad  hoc  committee  was  to  establish  a  forum  for  inter- 
change and  coordination  of  information  of  primary  interest  to  State 
officials  in  the  operational  or  regulatory  aspects  of  weather  modifica- 
tion.12 Meeting  in  October  1974,  the  ad  hoc  committee  summarized  the 
following  bases  of  concern : 

(1)  Substantial  but  fragmental  local.  State,  and  Federal  activity 
in  deliberate  and  inadvertent  weather  modification. 

(2)  Weather  modification  effects  do  not  respect  internal  or  national 
boundaries  and  no  compacts  or  agreements  exist  regarding  the  effects. 

(3)  States  require  a  measure  of  control  over  weather  modification. 

(4)  No  effective  mechanism  existed  for  interstate  cooperation  in 
weather  modification  and  the  States  did  not  have  a  coordinated  ap- 
proach for  atmospheric  resources  decisionmaking. 

(5)  Minimal  public  involvement  in  whether  modification  decision- 
making had  been  solicited  in  the  past. 

(6)  Lack  of  uniformity  existed  in  most  State  statutes. 

(7)  Little  exchange  of  information  among  States  had  taken  place. 

(8)  Weather  modification  decisionmaking  must  be  responsive  to 
local.  State,  and  interstate  concerns. 

(9)  Weather  modification  activities  in  response  to  emergency 
drought  conditions  would  be  most  effective  through  an  interstate 
organization  of  State  representatives.13 

The  ad  hoc  committee  suggested  that  the  overall  object ives  of  the 
proposed  Interstate  Council  must  be  to  serve  as  the  focal  point  and 

9  The  South  Dakota  program  lias  since  heen  curtailed,  owing  to  action  of  the  State  Legis- 
lature. See  discussion  of  the  weather  modification  activities  in  South  Dakota,  p.  3.76. 

10  Kneip.  Richard  P.,  letter  of  invitation  to  Governors  of  the  United  States  to  the  Inter- 
state Conference  on  Weather  Modification.  June  10-12.  1974.  Sioux  City.  S.  Dak..  Pierre, 
S.  Dak..  February  19.  1974. 

11  Keyes,  Conrad  G..  Jr..  "North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council  :  Need, 
finals.  I'urpose,  and  Activities,"  Water  Resources  Bulletin,  vol.  13,  No.  5,  Octoher  1977, 
p.  91 K. 

™  Ibid. 
13  Ibid. 


335 


clearinghouse  for  interstate  weather  modification  activities  and  out- 
lined the  following  specific  objectives : 

(1)  Serve  as  the  official  spokesman  for  States'  needs  and  views. 

(2)  Provide  the  organization  through  which  funding  of  multi-State 
assistance  programs  can  be  accomplished. 

(3)  Provide  a  forum  for  developing  interstate  agreements. 

(■4)  Develop  and  promote  the  adoption  of  compatible  State  regula- 
tory activities. 

(5)  Develop  and  provide  information  for  public  use. 

(6)  Exchange  information  and  provide  assistance  in  environmental 
and  societal  relations.14 

The  NAIWMC  called  its  first  business  meeting  in  Denver,  Colo., 
on  January  17,  1975,  following  the  second  interstate  conference  on 
weather  modification.15  During  this  first  meeting  the  Council  adopted 
bylaws,  elected  an  executive  committee  and  a  board  of  directors,  and 
adopted  several  resolutions.16  Membership  was  made  available  to  all 
of  the  States  of  the  United  States,  to  the  Government  of  Mexico,  and 
to  all  the  Provinces  of  Canada.  Each  of  these  jurisdictions  electing 
to  become  a  member  was  to  affirm  its  decision  through  informing  the 
-Council  of  its  support,  appointment  of  a  Council  delegate  and  alter- 
nate, and  payment  of  dues.  Affiliate  membership  was  also  made  avail- 
able to  national  agencies,  political  subdivisions  within  States  or 
Provinces,  and  professional  organizations.  Ten  geographical  areas 
were  formed  as  shown  in  table  2;  areas  2  and  4  were  Canada  and 
Mexico,  respectively,  while  the  other  8  areas  were  comprised  of 
regional  groupings  of  the  50  U.S.  States.  Figure  1  shows  the  mem- 
bership within  these  10  areas  as  of  October  1977,  according  the  the 
several  membership  categories.  (At  its  November  1977  meeting,  the 
NAIWMC  was  reorganized  into  six  districts — four  in  the  United 
States :  one  each  in  Canada  and  Mexico.) 

Table  2. — Areas  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council. 

through  October  1977  1 


Area  1  Washington,  Oregon,  Idaho,  Montana.  Wyoming.  Alaska. 

Area  2  Canada. 

Area  3  California,  Nevada,   Utah,   Arizona,   Colorado,   New  Mexico, 

Hawaii. 
Area  4  Mexico. 

Area  5  North  Dakota,   South  Dakota,   Nebraska,   Minnesota.  Iowa, 

Wisconsin. 

Area  6  Kansas,  Oklahoma,  Texas. 

Area  7  Michigan.  Illinois.  Indiana.  Ohio,  Kentucky. 

Area  8  Tennessee.  North  Carolina.  South  Carolina,  Alabama,  Georgia, 

Florida.  Mississippi. 

Area  9  West   Virginia.   Virginia.   Maryland.  Delaware.   New  Jersey. 

Pennsylvania. 

Area  10  New  York,  Connecticut.  Rhode  Island,  Massachusetts.  Vermont. 

New  Hampshire,  Maine. 


xAt  its  annual  meeting.  November  3-4.  1977,  the  NAIWMC  reorganized  into  six  areas, 
consisting  of  four  in  the  United  States  (Western,  Midwestern,  Eastern,  and  Southeastern), 
one  in  Canada  (northern),  and  one  in  Mexico  (southern). 


14  Hud.,  p.  919. 

15  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council,  "Conference  on  Weather 
Modification — a  Usable  Technology  ;  Its  Potential  Impact  on  the  World  Food  Crisis,"  Den- 
ver. Col..  Jan.  16-17.  1975.  150  pp. 

16Keyes.  Conrad  G..  Jr..  "NAIWMC — Formation  and  Its  Activities  Through  1975,"  the 
Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  8,  No.  1,  April  1976,  pp.  158-159. 


336 


Figure  1. — Map  showing  the  location  of  1976  members  and  geographical  distri- 
bution of  board  of  directors  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modi- 
fication Council  (from  Keyes,  1977).  (At  its  November  1977  annual  meeting, 
the  NAIWMG  reorganized  into  six  areas — see  footnote  X,  table  2,  p.  835.) 

The  purpose  of  the  NAIWMC,  as  stated  in  the  adopted  bylaws,  is 
divided  into  the  following  six  categories  : 

Operations. — Tho  Council  shall  assist  governmental  and  private  or- 
ganizations in  planning,  design,  implementation7,  coordination,  and 
assessment  of  ongoing,  temporary,  and  emergency  Weather  modifica- 
tion operations  which  are  planned  with  the  intent  or  conducted  with 
the  effect  of  causing  international,  national,  interstate,  or  intrastate 
consequences.  The  Council  shall  promote  effective  partnerships  among 
various  agencies  conducting  weather  modification  operations,  and 
shall  assist  in  integrating  weather  modification  operations  with  water 
resources  development  and  other  activities  affected  by  weather  modi- 
fication activities. 


337 


Research  and  development. — The  Council  shall  assist  governmental 
and  private  organizations  in  planning,  design,  implementation,  co- 
ordination, and  assessment  of  weather  modification  research  and  de- 
velopment. It  shall  promote  common  research  concerning  weather 
modification  activities  and  their  environmental  and  societal  conse- 
quences. The  Council  shall  provide  a  forum  for  the  exchange  of  expe- 
rience, data,  and  information  about  weather  modification. 

Public  involvment. — The  Council  shall  seek  to  provide  informa- 
tion for  and  engage  the  discussions  with  (a)  public  officials,  (b)  per- 
sons involved  in  weather  modification  activities  or  who  demonstrate 
an  interest  in  the  effects  of  weather  modification,  and  (c)  the  general 
public.  It  shall  serve  as  spokesman  for  the  needs  and  views  of  the 
member  jurisdictions,  and  it  shall  develop  public  education  programs. 

Legislation. — The  Council  shall  assist  national  governments,  State 
or  Provincial  governments,  and  groups  of  State  or  Provincial  govern- 
ments in  preparation,  review,  and  alternation  of  treaties,  statutes, 
compacts,  and  administrative  rules  and  regulations.  It  shall  seek  to 
obtain  legislation  which  is  responsive  to  local.  State,  interstate,  na- 
tional, and  international  concerns. 

Regulations. — The  Council  shall  assist  regulatory  agencies  in  main- 
taining a  high  level  of  integrity  and  professional  competency  among 
weather  modifiers.  It  shall  assist  regulatory  agencies  in  coordination 
of  their  professional  licensing  and  operational  permit  issuing  func- 
tions. It  shall  serve  as  a  clearinghouse  for  environmental  impact 
statements  relating  to  weather  modification  and  for  such  other  data 
as  will  assist  regulatory  agencies. 

Miscellaneous. — The  Council  shall  serve  such  other  purposes  relat- 
ing to  the  development,  operation,  and  control  of  weather  modifica- 
tion as  are  consistent  with  those  purposes  expressly  named  in  this 
article.  Such  purposes  shall  be  stated  by  resolution  adopted  at  annual, 
regular,  or  special  meetings  of  the  Council.17 

Counting  the  January  1975  conference  in  Denver  as  the  first  meeting 
of  the  Council,  there  have  been  a  total  of  five  NAIWMC  conferences 
through  1977.  The  second  annual  meeting  was  held  in  January  1976 
at  Kansas  City,  Mo.18  Two  subsequent  conferences  were  also  held  dur- 
ing 1976,  both  in  Denver,  in  August  and  December,  respectively.  The 
first  of  these  was  a  special  meeting  on  legal  uncertainties  of  weather 
modification,  and  the  December  conference  was  the  third  annual  meet- 
ing of  the  Council.19  At  both  of  these  conferences,  the  Council  held 
business  meetings.  The  1977  regular  meeting  of  the  NAIWMC  was 
held  November  3-4  in  Canada  at  Calgary,  Alberta.  Proceedings  of  the 
1977  conference  will  be  published  during  1978. 

The  annual  meetings  of  the  NAIWMC  provide  opportunities  to  ex- 
change information  on  weather  modification  activities  within  the  sev- 
eral Council  areas  and  to  discuss  and  act  upon  resolutions  and  posi- 
tion statements  pertaining  to  matters  of  State,  regional,  national,  and 
international  concern.  Five  resolutions  were  passed  at  the  first  meeting 
in  J anuary  1975,  on  the  following  subjects : 

1.  Federal  and  State  legislative  actions  affecting  weather  modifica- 

17  Keyes.  "North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council :  Need,  Goals,  Pur- 
pose, and  Activities."  1977.  pp.  919-920. 

18  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council.  "Conference  on  Weather 
Modification.  Todav  and  Tomorrow,"  January  15-16,  1976,  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  publication 
No.  76-1.  NAIWMC.  Las  Cruces.  N.  Mex..  119  pp. 

19  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council,  "Legal  Uncertainties  and 
Legislation  in  Weather  Modification  ;  Special  and  Third  Annual  Meeting  of  the  Council," 
NAIWMC  publication  No.  77-1.  September  1977.  172  pp. 


338 


tion:  The  unanimous  decision  of  the  NAIWMC  was  to  inform  all 
Federal  legislators  of  the  existence  of  the  Council  and  of  the  interest 
and  willingness  of  the  organization  to  assist  in  the  preparation  and 
review  of  existing  and  proposed  Federal  legislation.  Further,  since 
some  of  the  States  have  successful  legislation  in  effect  and  have  had 
considerable  experience  in  implementing  their  laws,  the  Council  felt  it 
appropriate  to  offer  the  expertise  of  its  members  to  assist  other  States 
in  preparation  and  development  of  weather  modification  legislation. 

2.  U.S.  Forest  Service  control  of  weather  modification  activities: 
Based  upon  the  Organic  Administration  Act  of  1897  (30  Stat.  34,  35, 
36;  16  U.S.C.  475),  regional  supervisors  of  the  Forest  Service  have 
recently  required  land  and  water  use  permits  for  weather  modification 
projects  possibly  impacting  national  forest  or  national  grassland 
areas.  The  NAIWMC  unanimously  opposed  this  action  of  some  Forest 
Service  personnel  and  strongly  recommended  that  both  Federal  and 
State  officials  and  agencies  address  this  problem,  since  its  ramifications 
could  well  reach  beyond  the  question  of  weather  modification  regula- 
tion and  control. 

3.  Planning  and  operation  of  weather  modification  programs  in 
drought  emergency  situations:  Because  of  existing  and  continuing 
drought  conditions  over  much  of  the  Great  Plains  and  the  Corn  Belt, 
it  was  anticipated  that  Federal  governments  may  implement  weather 
modification  activities  as  a  drought  relief  tool.  It  was  noted,  however, 
that  the  feasibility  of  such  relief  was  limited  to  decisionmaking  totally 
within  Federal  agencies,  without  consultation  with  officials  of  poten- 
tially affected  States.  The  NAIWMC  recommended  that  State  agen- 
cies be  consulted  and  included  in  the  planning,  developing,  and  imple- 
menting of  emergency  weather  modification  programs  during  drought 
situations. 

4.  Assistance  in  reviewing,  assessing,  and  furthering  the  field  of 
weather  modification  by  the  Weather  Modification  Association :  In  this 
resolution  the  NAIWMC  requested  that  the  Weather  Modification  As- 
sociation consider  supporting  the  concept  of  the  Council  and  agree  to 
provide  a  ready  and  willing  reservoir  of  talent  and  expertise  to  the 
Council  and/or  the  various  States.20 

5.  Emergency  drought  assistance  bill,  S.  4028,  93d  Congress:  The 
NAIWMC  strongly  supported  the  concept  of  utilizing  weather  modi- 
fication as  proposed  in  the  bill,  but  further  suggested  that  these  con- 
cepts be  expanded  to  specifically  include  a  strong  organizational  struc- 
ture at  the  State  level,  advanced  technical  planning,  the  mechanisms 
for  quick-reacting  financial  response,  and  a  strong  local  input  to  sub- 
sequent field  operations.  The  Council  furthermore  recommended  that 
such  a  bill  ought  to  specify  a  mechanism  for  recognizing  and  antici- 
pating the  conditions  under  which  its  provisions  would  come  to  play 
so  that  relief  could  be  given  before  a  drought  becomes  advanced  and 
critical.21 

At  the  January  1070  meeting,  the  Council  adopted  position  state- 
ments on  bills  then  before  the  94th  Congress  of  the  United  States.  The 

2,)  The  purposes  and  activities  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association  are  discussed  un- 
der Private  Activities  in  eh.  8.  p.  •"'•!•<». 

21  Keyes.  "NAIWMC — Formation  and  Its  Activities  Through  1975,"  1976,  pp.  160-162. 


339 


first  of  three  bills  introduced  by  Senator  Henry  Bellmon,  S.  2705,  to 
establish  a  National  Weather  Modification  Commission,  was  strongly 
supported  by  the  Council,  which  pledged  to  work  with  such  a  com- 
mission if  established.  No  position  was  adopted,  however,  on  the  other 
two  "Bellmon  bills,"  and  an  opposing  position  was  taken  on  H.R. 
10039  (the  "Evans  bill'').22 

The  NAIWMC  has  established  close  coordination  with  the  Council 
of  State  governments  and  the  National  Conference  of  State  Legisla- 
tures, recommending  that  input  be  made  on  weather  modification  at 
future  meetings  of  both  groups.  Suggested  issues  to  be  discussed  at 
such  meetings  include  interstate  arrangements  for  research,  operations, 
and  evaluation;  provision  of  institutional  framework  for  handling 
funding  and  tradeoffs  between  various  societal  segments;  and  provi- 
sion of  better  information  to  State  decisionmakers  in  both  the  execu- 
tive and  legislative  branches.23  In  January  1976  the  Council  adopted 
a  resolution  to  support  the  draft  of  the  proposed  model  law  on  weather 
modification,  prepared  by  Prof.  Ray  Davis  of  the  University  of  Ari- 
zona. Copies  of  this  draft  law  have  been  provided  to  the  Model  Law 
Committee  of  the  Council  of  State  Governments.  The  NAIWMC  also 
supported  the  concept  of  and  sponsored  four  participants  to  the  con- 
ference on  "Legal  and  Scientific  Uncertainties  of  Weather  Modifica- 
tion," conducted  by  the  American  Bar  Foundation  and  the  American 
Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science  at  Duke  University  on 
March  12-13,  1976.  State  governments  have  requested  and  received 
testimony  from  members  of  the  Council ;  and,  in  particular,  such  testi- 
mony was  provided  at  meetings  of  the  Minnesota  Task  Force  on 
Weather  Modification  and  the  Minnesota  State  Senate  prior  to  adop- 
tion of  the  new  Minnesota  weather  modification  statute.124 

The  Council  has  also  participated  with  Federal  agencies  in  planning 
future  weather  modification  projects  affecting  various  regions  of  the 
country.  A  cooperative  planning  session  on  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion's proposed  Colorado  River  weather  modification  demonstration 
program  was  sponsored  by  the  NAIWMC  in  Denver  in  August  1976. 
Invited  to  the  session  were  the  seven  States  on  the  Colorado  River 
Basin,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  the  Upper  Colorado  River  Com- 
mission, and  State  commissions  from  the  lower  river  basin.  The  Coun- 
cil has  also  been  requested  by  the  Advanced  Planning  Group  on 
NOAA's  Weather  Modification  Project  Office  in  Boulder  to  provide 
input  to  planning  of  future  weather  modification  research  projects.-5 

In  order  to  learn  about  the  State  weather  modification  activities, 
laws,  institutional  structure,  research  recommendations,  and  potential 
interest  in  participation  on  the  Council,  the  NAIWMC  circulated  a 
number  of  questionnaires  among  the  officials  and  agencies  of  State 
governments  during  1976  and  1977.  Information  from  these  surveys 
has  been  summarized  in  tabulated  form  and  conclusions  formulated 

22  See  ch.  5.  p.  20H.  for  a  synopsis  of  tbe<-e  bills  introduced  in  +he  94th  Congress. 

23  Keves.  'North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council:  Need,  Goals,  Pur- 
pose, and  Activities,"  1977,  p.  922. 

24  Ibid. 

25  Ibid. 


340 


by  the  executive  secretary  of  the  Council.  This  information  is  presented 
elsewhere  in  this  report  in  discussions  of  State  weather  modification 
activities  2G  and  recommended  research  activities  for  Federal  agencies.27 
Questionnaires  and  regional  meetings  of  the  NAIWMC  have  de- 
fined potential  users  of  weather  modification  technology  throughout 
the  North  American  Continent.  Views  on  legislation  have  also  been 
presented  in  testimony  at  1976  weather  modification  hearings  in  both 
Houses  of  the  U.S.  Congress  and  before  Appropriation  Committees  in 
19TT.  Testimony  was  also  provided  by  the  NAIWMC  to  the  U.S. 
Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  at 
its  fifth  meeting  in  October  1977  in  Champaign,  111.  Recommendation 
by  the  States,  presented  through  the  Council  in  such  testimony,  has 
generally  supported  a  Federal  law  which  would  include  establishment 
of  a  national  weather  modification  policy  in  research  and  development, 
a  coordinated  effort  of  Federal  activities  (possibly  by  regions  or  major 
water  basins) ,  and  a  common  licensing  and  permit  system  administered 
by  the  States.28 

Results  of  a  survey  of  State  interests  in  weather  modification,  con- 
ducted by  the  NAIWMC,  are  included  in  the  following  section. 

SURVEY  AND  SUMMARY  OF  STATE  INTERESTS  AND  ACTIVITIES  IN  WEATHER 

MODIFICATION 

During  1977,  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification 
Council  (NAIWMC)  surveyed  weather  modification  interests  in  all 
50  States,  posing  the  following  questions  to  appropriate  State  agencies 
or  officials : 

1.  Which  organizations  in  your  State  have  the  mission  of  licensing, 
monitoring,  controlling,  or  operating  weather  modification  activities  ? 

2.  Does  your  State  presently  support  weather  modification  pro- 
grams ? 

3.  What  weather  modification  regulation  does  your  State  have? 

4.  What  positions  on  weather  modification  does  your  State  have  ?  29 
The  responses  received  in  reply  to  the  NAIWMC  questionnaire  have 

since  been  revised  and  updated.  The  data  in  table  3  were  obtained 
from  officials  in  the  respective  States  and  have  been  updated  through 
January  1978.30  In  the  table  the  States  are  arranged  according  to  the 
10  areas  to  which  they  had  been  assigned  by  the  NAIWMC  prior  to 
the  reorganization  into  six  areas  at  the  November  1977  annual  meet- 
ing.31 (Areas  2  and  4  were  comprised  of  the  Canadian  Provinces  and 
the  Mexican  States,  respectively,  and  are  not  included  in  the  results  of 
the  survey.) 

26  See  p.  :i41  in  this  chapter. 
2"  See  ch.  3,  p.  138. 

28  Keyes,  Conrad  G.,  Jr.,  "Federal  Research  iseeds  and  New  Law  Requirements  in  Weather 
Modification  :  the  NAIWMC  Viewpoint,"  testimony  before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Champaign,  in..  Oct.  14.  1977. 

-"'  Keyes,  "North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council  :  Need,  Goals,  Pur- 
pose, arid  Activities,"  1077.  p.  924.  (In  addition  to  these  four  questions,  the  States  were  also 
queried  about  their  interests  and  potential  participation  in  the  Council ;  since  these  latter 
questions  and  responses  to  them  are  not  germane  to  the  general  survey  of  State  activities, 
they  are  not  included  in  the  list  aliove  or  in  the  assemblage  of  responses  in  table  3.) 
Keyes.  Conrad  (J..  Jr..  Private  communication,  January  1!)7S. 

ni  See  preceding  section,  p.  .°>.'W,  for  a  discussion  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather 
Modification  Council. 


341 


5  § 
"co  ce 


s  <  ^ 


;  £  a>  <u 

1  Zr,  =  1= 
•  <13  O  O 


inoi  □ 


O  CO 


_  co  o 
c:  o.  o. 
o  p  a. 

■=  o  = 

o  o 

s|.l 

S  o  u 

CK0-< 


II 

■DO 

o 

Mi;  o 

3  3  01  o 
u-oo  z: 


E  2 

5 


'  E      ro^  he  _ 

■K     So©  g 

ca            o  ■= 

•  a.  «c« 

io  512  1 

c  co  c  ° 

1  qo     a>  a.  o>  ^ 

c  -  E^  E  >- 

m          to  a)  ra  £ 

o  a>  °  a>  ™  a>  <u 


o  ^ 

S  ° 


3  = 
O  TO 

o  | 

CM  o 


5 

■25 

M 

o  E 
a)  co 
«  g- 

So 


5  S 

O  03 

ec  — 


=  ^•2:5 


c  o  ro  °  — '  ^ 


E<§ 


03  S— 1"D  =•  Z3 
C  BlO.  C        BO  at 

o  03—  3      a>  Q3 


a>  C  03  «3 

E  S'Eo 


1  ■§  • 

CO        o  , 

iservatioi 

IS. 

id  Cloud 

sion. 

esources. 

)ervisors. 
:ulture. . 
culture., 
in  Board. 

8  Iff? 

—  o  £  =  -2 

O  K       H  " 
03  c  o  > 

rdof  Su| 
:  of  Agrii 
:  of  Agri 
dificatic 

irtmenl 
atural  F 
ther  Cc 
cation  I 
iion  of 

ity  Boa 
irtmenl 
irtmenl 

:her  Mc 

Dep; 

N; 
Wea 

ifi 
Divi; 

rjO-Q-CO 
o  a>  as 

o<2'-1  v 


O  CO 

2=5 


E  ^ 

CO  c 
Q.  = 


<u  co_r- 


< 

a; 


c  co  -r; 
^E  = 


342 


O  3 


o:  o  M 

Q  <  * 

M  Z  U 

<  w  lc 


<i>  a>  o 
o  o  a. 


;§  2 


E""=> 
r-  O 


!  o  5  42 
oo  zco> 


<d  a>  a> 
c  =  c  5 
o  o  o  ° 


a>  oj -J 
c  era. 
o  o  — 


01  u  u 
C  03  03 

o  a.  a. 
2ZOO 


CO 

e 

"2  1 

co  a. 

,  > 

a 


•~.2  • 

CO  ^  CO 


CO        CO        CO  >  CO  c 
•-        C  O  cZ 


I  I 


CO  CO  CO 

c  cc  c 
o  o  o 


CO  CO  CO  CO 

cc  c  c  c 
o  o  o  o 


co  co  r 
o  O. 


CO  CO  CO 
£=  C  C 

o  o  o 


CO  CO  CO  CO 

c  c  c  c 
o  o  o  o 


_  E 

<=  ='E 
o  o- 


oci"£  E 


Vi  —  s 


E  "  oo 


E-2 


_  co  co  a,  co  _ 

cr  cr  cccc 

o  o  co  o  o  o  o 

zzo  2  z  z:  2: 


L2  2  <« 

1.  CO  <o  co 


«^3C 
•  —  O  o  CO 
5ZV)r- 


CO  CO 

o  o 


CO  CO  CO 

O  CO  CO  o  o 


oo 

'  CO 

I  CO 

IT3 
i  O 

O 

c_> 

nn. 

Ms. 

< 

CC 

-o 

CO* 

_Co 

03 

co 

CO 

a. 

CO 

nn 

< 

Q-E 


COCO 
-OCSI 


CO  CO 

11 


C  CO 


o  o  - 


3  oe  <✓>  co  c 
•a  co  co  co  o 
lu  or  ce  cc  z 


E  ™ 
.5  oo 

CO  CO  cr 


CO  03  03  CO  CO  CO  CO 

c  c  c  c  c  c  c 
o  o  o  o  o  o  o 


co  j2  = 
^-JooS 

CC  C>  c 
CO  o  CZ  CO  03  o  o 

oz<o:uzz 


03  03  03  03  03  03  03 

cr  e  c  cr  cr  cr  c 
o  o  o  o  o  o  o 


o  o  o  o  £  o  o 


Jcijcccc 
o>  0  03  0  0  0  0 


cc  lu 

>5  <  I 

:•>  03 


co  <D     •  — 


-  03 

>5 


e^t-^j 

7j  CO  O—  C 
CO  CC  >-  Q)  O 

t=  -  «  s  S  o  !: 

o  (O  CO  CO  CO  JZ  CO 

oSSzzoo 


343 


In  his  analysis  of  the  responses  to  the  NATVVMC  questionnaire 
Keyes  has  made  the  following  observations : 32 

h  Few  States  have  weather  modification  regulation  outside  a  de- 
partment of  water  or  natural  resources. 

2.  Only  a  few  States  have  direct  involvement  in  on-going  weather 
modification  programs. 

3.  Several  States  support  the  concept  of  funding  further  research 
in  weather  modification. 

4.  Twenty-nine  States  have  a  law  that  deals  directly  or  indirectly 
with  weather  modification. 

5.  Very  few  States  have  positions  concerning  weather  modification 
programs. 

STATE  CONTACTS  FOR  INFORMATION  ON  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES 

The  diversity  of  weather  modification  activities  within  the  States 
and  the  frequent  changes  in  State  laws  and  procedures  for  executing 
the  provisions  of  the  laws  point  to  the  need  for  obtaining  current 
information  on  a  given  State  through  responsible  State  officials.  Also, 
further  information  on  the  statute's  official  activities,  and  policy  to- 
ward weather  modification  in  the  several  States  can  be  obtained 
through  contacting  appropriate  individuals  within  the  governmental 
structure  of  each  State.  A  list  of  such  persons,  found  in  appendix  E, 
has  been  assembled  from  names  and  addresses  of  persons  within  the 
States,  collected  by  the  Xorth  American  Interstate  Weather  Modifica- 
tion Council  (NAIWMC),  who  have  some  interest  and/or  respon- 
sibility for  weather  modification.33 

The  list  in  appendix  E  is  intended  to  provide  a  single  point  of 
contact  within  each  State  and  is  believed  to  be  current  as  of  January 
1978.  The  individuals  listed  are  cognizant  of  official  State  activities 
and  current  State  laws;  however,  they  can  also  serve  as  starting  points 
within  each  State,  leading  to  subsequent  contacts  for  additional  in- 
formation for  which  they  may  not  have  direct  responsibility.  Such 
information  might  relate  to  local  operations  and  activities  of  citizens 
groups,  commercial  operators  incorporated  and  based  within  the  State 
(whose  sphere  of  operations  includes  other  States  and  countries), 
university  research  projects,  and  Federal  research  projects  conducted 
within  the  State. 

The  list  of  individuals  in  appendix  E  is  complete  in  that  all  50 
States  are  represented,  including  those  without  weather  modification 
laws.  In  the  latter  cases,  the  names  or  offices  appearing  are  those  quali- 
fied to  respond  to  queries  on  private  or  local  activities  within  the 
State  or  on  current  and  future  State  interest  on  the  subject.  The  entries 
in  the  list  are  alphabetically  ordered  according  to  State  name. 

NONFEDERAL  U.S.  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES 

The  mechanism  for  reporting  of  U.S.  weather  modification  activities 
to  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  through  the  National  Oceanic  and  At- 
mospheric Administration  (XOAA).  as  required  by  Public  Law  92- 
205  and  its  amendments,  has  been  discussed  under  activities  of  the 
executive  branch  of  the  Federal  Government.34  In  accordance  with  the 

32  Keves.  "North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council :  Need,  Goals.  Pur- 
pose, and  Activities."  1977.  pp.  924-925. 

33  Keyes,  Conrad  G.,  Jr.  (executive  secretary  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather 
Modification  Council),  private  communication. 

34  See  chapter  5,  p.  232. 


344 


requirement  for  publishing  summary  reports  on  these  activities  "from 
time  to  time,''  XOAA  has  prepared  four  such  summary  reports,  the 
last  of  which  covers  projects  which  were  actively  in  progress  at  some 
time  during  calendar  year  1975. 35  (A  summary  report  incorporating 
similar  activities  for  calendar  years  1976  and  1977  is  in  preparation  by 
NOAA.)  For  convenience,  the  NOAA  summary  reports  include  data 
on  Federal  research  projects  as  well  as  all  U.S.  non-Federal  projects 
although  the  law  requires  only  reporting  of  the  latter  category  of 
activities. 

Analysis  of  calendar  year  1975  projects 

The  total  listing  of  both  non-Federal  and  Federal  U.S.  weather 
modification  projects  conducted  during  1975  and  appearing  in  the 
latest  XOAA  summary  report36  appeal's  in  appendix  G.  Of  the  85 
projects  reported  in  1975,  12  were  completed  early  in  the  year,  but  12 
similar  projects  were  reinstated  later  the  same  year  at  the  same  loca- 
tions. Furthermore,  two  U.S.  Air  Force  operational  projects  in  Alaska 
were  replaced  during  the  same  year  by  a  single  project.  Of  the  72  non- 
duplicative projects  in  as  many  separate  locations,  58  were  nonfed- 
erally  sponsored  and  the  Federal  Government  sponsored  14.  This 
division  and  the  breakdown  of  the  72  projects  by  numbers  in  various 
categories  of  initiation,  completion,  and  continuation  during  1975  are 
shown  in  table  4.  Tables  5  and  6  give  numbers  of  projects  carried  out 
according  to  various  types  of  operators  and  according  to  kinds  of 
sponsors,  respectively.  Some  activities,  such  as  fog  dispersal  projects 
at  airports,  have  multiple  sponsors,  as  several  airlines,  for  example, 
may  enter  into  joint  funding  arrangements.  Of  the  80  distinct  sponsors 
in  table  6,  at  least  13  are  public  at  the  State  and  local  level  if  the  four 
categories — municipal  districts.  States,  cities,  and  counties — are  com- 
bined. At  least  23  non-Federal  public  projects  during  1975  can  be 
counted,  however,  from  the  listing  in  appendix  G,  since  some  of  the 
sponsors  enumerated  in  table  6  funded  more  than  one  project ;  some  of 
the  sponsors  counted  in  the  category  of  "airlines/airports"  were  also 
public  agencies. 

The  purposes  for  the  reported  activities  are  identified,  with  the  cor- 
responding numbers  of  each,  in  table  7.  The  total  in  this  table  (88)  is 
larger  than  the  number  of  nonduplicative  projects  (72)  because  some 
projects  were  conducted  for  two  purposes.37 

Table  4. — Active,  nonduplicative  weather  modification  projects  in  the  United  States 
in  calendar  year  1975  {from  Charak,  1976) 


Non-Federal  projects   58 

Federally  sponsored  projects   14 

Projects  active  on  Jan.  1,  1975   35 

Projects  active  on  Dec.  31,  1975   2fi 

Projects  active  on  Jan.  1  and  Dec.  31,  1975   10 

Projects  initiated  in  calendar  year  1975   37 

Projects  completed  in  calendar  year  1975   46 


35  Charak.  Mason  T..  "Wenther  Modification  Activity  Reports:  Calendar  Year  197.V  Na- 
tional Oceanic  and  Atmosnheric  Administration,  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and 
Prediction.  Rockville,  Md..  June  197G.  64  pp. 

Mlhid..  pp.  19-35. 

37  Ibid.,  pp.  3-7. 


345 


TABLE  5.— OPERATORS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  (FROM  CHARAK,  1976) 

Type  Operators 

Commercial  weather  modifiers   15 

Universities    5 

Federal   5 

Municipal  districts   5 

Community  associations   2 

Power  companies   1 

Individuals   2 

Total     35 


Activities 


72 


TABLE  6.— SPONSORS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  (FROM  CHARAK,  1976) 


Type 

Community  associations. 

Federal  

Airlines/airports  

Municipal  districts  

States   

Power  companies  

Private  sector  

Cities  

Counties  

Total   


Sponsors 


Activities 


TABLE  7.— PURPOSE  AND  SPONSORSHIP  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  (FROM  CHARAK,  1976) 


Sponsors 


Snow 


Precipita- 
tion 


Disperse  fog 


Cold 


Warm 


Decrease 
hail 


Research 


Community  associations    5   

Airlines/airports   

Federal  agencies  

Municipal  districts   4  3 

States   6  

Power  companies   2 

Private  sector   ....  1   

Cities  

Counties   1   


Total   17  5 


16   6  

9  1   

2    12 

2    1   

1    6  1 

2  

1    2 

1  1  1   

  1   


22  13  2  14  1  5 


Table  8  summarizes  weather  modification  statistics  by  State  and  by 
total  target  area  covered  for  1975.  Seventy-five  activities  in  25  States 
are  shown,  duplications  appearing  over  the  72  basic  project  locations 
because  three  projects  extended  into  adjoining  States — from  Michigan 
into  Indiana,  from  Delaware  into  Maryland,  and  from  California  into 
Nevada.  The  geographical  distribution  of  all  reported  projects  is  shown 
in  figure  2.  Numbers  on  the  map  indicate  the  order  in  which  initial 
project  reports  were  received  by  XOAA.  missing  numbers  correspond- 
ing to  projects  reported  in  earlier  years  but  now  terminated.  An  ;'Fr 
adjacent  to  a  number  indicates  a  federally  sponsored  project. 3S 

Eighty  percent  of  U.S.  weather  modification  projects  were  carried 
out  west  of  Kansas  City  during  1975,  with  the  largest  projects  in  Cali- 
fornia, Oklahoma.  South  Dakota,  and  Colorado,  in  that  order  of  size. 
South  Dakota,  Utah.  North  Dakota.  Kansas,  and  California,  in  order, 
had  the  largest  area  coverage  from  these  projects.  In  the  East.  Michi- 


38  Ibid.,  pp.  8-10. 


346 


gan  led  in  the  number  of  projects,  while  Florida  had  the  most  area  cov- 
ered. The  total  target  area  comprised  about  5  percent  of  the  total  area 
of  the  United  States,  Federal  activities  accounting  for  about  7  percent 
and  commercial  operators  for  93  percent  of  this  area.  Sixty-five  percent 
of  the  area  of  South  Dakota  was  specified  as  target  area,  while  in  Utah. 
Delaware,  and  North  Dakota  corresponding  percentages  were  49,  36, 
and  26,  respectively.39 

TABLE  8.— LOCATION  AND  SIZE  OF  TARGET  AREAS  (FROM  CHARAK,  1976) 


Target  area 

Location  Activities   (square  miles) 


Alaska    2  51 

California       11  5,183 

Colorado     6  3,315 

Delaware....     1  750 

Florida     2  4,878 

Idaho    1  198 

Illinois     1  2 

Indiana      1  204 

Iowa        2  4 

Kansas        1  9,000 

Maryland      1  750 

Michigan     6  3,507 

Montana         1  5 

Nebraska     1  2 

Nevada     2  755 

New  Hampshire      1  4 

North  Dakota   5  18,629 

Oklahoma.      9  7,885 

Oregon       3  7,841 

Pennsylvania     1  200 

South  Dakota     ....  7  50,085 

Texas      3  7,200 

Utah..      3  41,510 

Washington        3  56 

Wyoming..    1  180 


Total      75  163,194 


:  i«_ 

138  139 
181 

137    136  135 


126  /  183F  75F 


IT?  175 


Tll8  \ 

Cl  171  '< 

^21?  177f\ 

_    Nuabera  Indicate 
approximate  project  location. 
An  " 7"  ahova  Federally 
aponeorad  activity.  Appendix 
A  con  talc  a  a  11a  t  of  theae 
numbered  projecta. 


FlOUEE  2.    Federal  and  non-Federal  weather  modification  activities  in  the  United 
Slates,  calendar  year  1975.  (From  Charak,  1J)7(>. ) 


•»  Ibid.,  p.  10. 


347 


Preliminary  analysis  of  projects  for  calendar  years  1976-77 

Prior  to  publication  of  the  next  XOAA  summary  of  U.S.  weather 
modification  projects,  to  be  completed  during  1978,  Charak  has  com- 
pleted a  preliminary  analysis  of  reported  projects  for  the  calendar 
years  1976-77.40  Table  9  provides  information  on  numbers  of  projects, 
operators,  and  sponsors  for  the  2  years.  An  increase  of  44  percent  in 
total  activities  is  seen  from  1976  to  1977,  although  Federal  projects  de- 
creased 33  percent  while  non-Federal  ones  increased  60  percent.  The 
number  of  non-Federal  weather  modifiers  remained  constant  for  the  2 
years ;  however,  there  was  an  approximate  40-percent  increase  in  the 
number  of  community  sponsoring  groups  from  1976  to  1977.  Further 
analysis  of  the  operators  in  1977  shows  that  six  commercial  firms  con- 
ducted 60  percent  of  the  activities,  and  three  of  these  companies  op- 
erated 50  percent  of  the  projects.  The  increase  in  projects  in  1977  re- 
flects the  efforts  to  combat  or  forestall  drought  conditions  in  the 
United  States  on  the  part  of  various  States,  local  farm  groups,  and 
municipal  water  districts.  Charak  feels  that  this  increase  may  also 
indicate  that  the  belief  in  the  potential  of  cloud  seeding  for  precipita- 
tion enhancement  is  shared  by  more  and  more  governmental  officials 
and  other  people  affected  by  water  shortages.41 

TABLE  9.— OPERATORS  AND  SPONSORS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

(FROM  CHARAK,  1978) 


Calendar  year— 
1976  1977 


Total  activities/locations     61  88 


Non-Federal..        52  82 

Federal       9  6 


Operators     31  29 


Federal                                                                                        .  4  2 

Non-Federal      27  27 

Commercial   '.    16  16 

Water  districts...       7  7 

Universities   2  2 

Community  associations                                                     .  1  1 

Utilities...   1  1 


Sponsors       59  68 


Community  associations...    18  25 

Airlines    10  10 

Municipal  districts      10  12 

Federal  organizations                                                                        .  6  3 

States   5  6 

Utilities   4  3 

Private    5  6 

Cities       1  3 


Table  10  shows  the  distribution  of  reported  activities  by  State  and 
by  total  target  area  size  within  the  States  for  the  2  years.  California 
led  in  the  number  of  activities  for  both  years  and  also  had  the  largest 
target  area  increase  from  1976  to  1977.  However,  the  total  target  area 
in  Utah  in  1977  was  the  largest  for  any  State  for  the  2  years.  Because 
some  projects  crossed  State  boundaries,  the  total  numbers  in  table  10 
exceed  the  numbers  in  table  9.  The  purposes  and  the  seeding  agents  for 

40  Charak.  Mason  T..  "Preliminary  Analysis  of  Reported  Weather  Modification  Activities 
in  the  United  States  for  Calendar  Year  1976-77."  Submitted  for  publication  in  The  Journal 
of  Weather  Modification,  197S. 

11  Ibid. 


348 


the  various  weather  modification  activities  are  given  in  table  11.  In- 
crease of  precipitation  continues  to  be  the  major  purpose  of  the  proj- 
ects. The  number  of  projects  directed  to  hail  suppression  was  reduced 
by  50  percent  over  the  previous  year  in  1977,  and  in  all  hail  projects 
there  was  the  additional  intended  goal  of  increasing  precipitation. 
The  most  used  seeding  agent  continues  to  be  silver  iodide,  although 
there  is  increased  use  of  dry  ice  for  precipitation  enhancement  as  well 
as  for  cold  fog  dispersal.42 

TABLE  10.— ACTIVITIES  AND  SIZE  OF  TARGET  AREAS,  BY  STATE  (FROM  CHARAK,  1978) 


Calendar  year  1976 


Area 
(square 

Activities  miles) 


Calendar  year  1977 


Area 
(square 

Activities  miles) 


Alaska    2  3  3  7 

California      11  11,993  20  59,403 

Colorado    3  2,915  6  31,300 

Delaware    ■.    1  1,000  0  0 

Florida    1  4,800  0  0 

Georgia      0  0  3  9,000 

Idaho     1  8,600  1  600 

Illinois      2  2,502  3  3,700 

Iowa     2  4  1  3,600 

Kansas....  .   1  9,000  1  10,400 

Louisiana    0  0  2  1,350 

Maryland     1  1,100  0  0 

Michigan     1  530  3  7,524 

Minnesota         2  15,381  1  240 

Montana    2  20,005  2  20,005 

Nebraska    12  0  0 

Nevada     1  5  7  16,326 

New  Hampshire      14  1  4 

North  Dakota.     4  23,068  3  16,288 

Oklahoma     7  6,948  2  719 

Oregon                                                  _____  2  7,821  3  836 

South  D'akota      3  11,821  1  2,500 

Texas   5  11,226  5  11,826 

Utah   4  59,410  9  92,135 

Washington    3  56  10  25,379 

Wisconsin     0  0  1  1,100 

Wyoming     2  196  4  1,446 

63  198,390  92  315,689 


TABLE  11.— WEATHER  MODIFICATION  PURPOSE  AND  AGENT  (FROM  CHARAK,  1978) 


Calendar  year— 
1976  1977 


Purpose: 

To  increase  precipitation. 

To  decrease  hail  

To  disperse  fog...  

For  research  

Agent: 

Silver  iodide.  

Dry  ice  

Liquid  propane  

Polyelectrolyte.  

Water  spray   


41 

76 

12 

6 

11 

8 

5 

4 

45 

74 

11 

17 

2 

4 

2 

1 

2 

0 

General  Discussion  of  Local  Weather  Modification  Policy 

and  Activities 

In  most  instances,  the  principal  beneficiaries  of  weather  modifica- 
tion are  the  local  or  regional  users  who  include  agricultural  invests, 

v  Ibid. 


349 


weather-relsrted  industries,  municipalities,  airports,  utilities,  and  ordi- 
nary citizens — those  individuals  and  groups  whose  economic  well-being 
and  whose  lives  and  property  are  subject  directly  to  adverse  conse- 
quences of  insufficient  water  supplies  or  the  extreme  effects  of  severe 
weather.  It  is  at  the  local  level  where  the  need  to  engage  in  weather 
modification  is  most  keenly  perceived.  Most  evident  at  this  same  level 
are  the  interests  of  those  who  may  be  affected  negatively  by  the  real  or 
perceived  results  of  weather  modification.  It  follows  that  both  the 
greatest  support  and  the  strongest  opposition  to  weather  modification 
projects  are  focused  at  the  local  level,  where  expressions  of  differing 
positions  are  most  vocal. 

The  popularity  of  a  particular  weather  modification  project  and 
the  degree  of  controversy  surrounding  a  project  are  frequently  deter- 
mined in  large  measure  by  the  extent  to  which  local  citizens  and 
organizations  have  a  voice  in  whether  a  project  shall  be  conducted, 
how  it  can  be  controlled  aaid  curtailed  if  necessary,  and  how  it  shall 
be  funded.  When,  as  in  some  States,  counties  or  municipalities  are 
authorized  to  raise  and  expend  tax  moneys  to  support  weather  modifi- 
cation, the  importance  of  this  voice  becomes  even  more  evident.  At 
the  local  level,  the  decision  to  implement  or  withdraw  from  a  project 
can  be  most  often  made  with  minimum  social  stress.  Table  12  sum- 
marizes the  results  of  a  study  by  Haas,  in  which  citizens  in  Colorado 
and  South  Dakota  were  polled  on  their  sentiments  on  the  level  of  gov- 
ernment or  other  groups  by  which  decisions  ought  to  be  and  likely  will 
be  made  on  local  cloud-seeding  projects.43  More  than  half  of  the  re- 
spondents in  the  survey  who  expressed  an  opinion  felt  that  local  resi- 
dents or  local  government  officials  should  make  such  decisions,  and 
the  greatest  plurality  held  that  the  decision  should  be  solely  that  of 
local  residents. 


TABLE  12.— CITIZEN  VIEWS  OF  WHO  SHOULD  AND  WHO  WILL  MAKE  THE  DECISION  REGARDING  A  LOCAL  CLOUD- 
SEEDING  PROJECT  (PRIOR  TO  START  OF  LOCAL  PROGRAM)  (FROM  HAAS,  1974) 

[In  percent) 


Colorado 
(N  =  168) 

South  Dakota 
(N  =  182) 

Response 

Should 

Will 

Should 

Will 

Local  residents    

  58 

16 

36 

7 

Local  government    

4 

2 

7 

13 

County  and  State  government    

  0) 

0) 

9 

15 

State  government  

  8 

14 

7 

21 

State  and  Federal  Government   

  7 

15 

6 

8 

Federal  Government   

  7 

18 

1 

8 

Scientists    

  7 

13 

7 

1 

Other,  including  combinations2   

  5 

8 

24 

7 

Don't  know  

  4 

14 

3 

20 

1  Not  included  in  Colorado  survey. 

2  Includes  6  percent  who  said,  "farmers  and  ranchers"  without  specifying  area  of  residence. 

Counties  and  other  local  governmental  jurisdictions  exercise  the 
greatest  control  over  weather  modification  through  their  willingness 
or  reluctance  to  support  with  tax  dollars  either  the  projects  initiated 
by  States  or  by  districts  within  the  States.  In  their  appraisal  of  the 

43Hass.  J.  Eugene,  "Sociological  Aspects  of  Weather  Modification,"  in  Wilmot  N.  Hess 
(editor).  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York.  Wiley,  1974,  p.  805. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  25 


350 


relevance  which  local  government  policy  at  various  levels  has  to 
weather  modification,  Lambright  and  Dorsey  conclude  that: 

The  jurisdictional  powers  of  local  government  bear  no  direct,  and  little  indi- 
rect, relationship  to  weather  modifications  activities.  Only  in  an  area  where  tax 
levies  are  authorized  for  the  support  of  weather  modification  (e.g.,  a  county)  can 
the  local  government  exercise  "control"  (positive  or  negative)  over  weather 
modification  by  its  willingness,  or  reluctance,  to  sponsor  the  activity.  Where 
multicounty.  cooperative  areas  are  involved,  the  actions  of  several  counties  can 
provide  a  substantial  substate  base  of  support  for  weather  modification  within 
a  State.  Acting  under  State  law.  these  substate  regions  can  become  the  principal 
structure  for  day-to-day  decisions  governing  the  technology.44  45 

In  both  North  and  South  Dakota,  counties  have  been  given  author- 
ity by  the  State  legislatures  to  levy  taxes  for  the  specific  purpose  of 
supporting  local  weather  modification  projects.  In  North  Dakota, 
county  weather  modification  authorities  are  created  to  provide  user 
control  over  projects  and  to  stabilize  local  social  problems  arising  from 
controversies  over  the  projects.  A  Xorth  Dakota  statute  provision  al- 
lows county  residents  to  withdraw  from  a  joint  State-county  project 
and  to  abolish  a  county  authority  through  circulation  of  petitions  or 
countywide  elections. 

A  California  statute,  enacted  in  1955  and  providing  authority  to 
various  local  governmental  units  to  support  and  conduct  weather  mod- 
ification operations,  states  that : 

Any  county,  city,  city  and  county,  district,  authority  or  other  public  corporation 
or  agency  which  has  the  power  to  produce,  conserve,  control  or  supply  water  for 
beneficial  purposes  shall  have  the  power  to  engage  in  practices  designed  to  pro- 
duce, induce,  increase  or  control  rainfall  or  other  precipitation  for  the  general 
benefit  of  the  territory  within  it.46 

Regulation  of  weather  modification  in  California  is  essentially  a 
function  of  the  State  and  not  local  governments.  This  division  of 
authority  follows  from  the  fundamental  role  of  the  State  to  allocate 
water,  even  though  the  California  constitution  gives  authority  to 
counties  and  cities  to  enact  regulatory  measures  so  long  as  they  do  not 
conflict  with  the  general  laws.  On  the  other  hand,  special  districts  are 
not  given  this  authority  nor  can  the  legislature  delegate  such  authority 
to  these  districts.  Since  the  State  has  already  enacted  minimal  weather 
modification  regulations,  local  regulatory  power  is  somewhat  limited 
as  it  may  not  conflict  with  the  State  provisions.47 

In  other  States  local  regulation  of  weather  modification  is  more  in 
evidence,  both  through  formal  and  informal  arrangements.  For  ex- 
ample, in  Pennsylvania,  where  the  State  law  does  permit  weather 
modification  projects  under  very  strict  regulations,  some  townships  in 
the  south-central  part  of  the  State  have  passed  ordinances  prohibiting 
all  such  activities.48 

"  Lambright,  W.  Henry  and  Thomas  A.  Dorsey,  "An  Issue  Paper:  Some  Notes  on  Inter- 
governmental  Relations  in  a  National  Weather  Modification  Policy,"  background  paper  pre- 
pared for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  Febru- 
ary 1977,  pp.  9-10. 

45  In  the  context  of  this  quotation,  "local"  refers  to  governments  at  the  subcounty  level  : 
whereas  the  term  "local"  means  any  jurisdiction.  Including  counties,  at  the  substate  level 
elsewhere  throughout  tins  chapter. 

"l  California  Government  Code.  sec.  53063.  (The  entire  body  of  California  State  law  per- 
taining to  weather  modifications  is  reproduced  in  app.  I),  p.  old). 

17  Sato.  Sbo,  -  The  Role  of  Local  Governmental  Units  in  Weather  Modification:  Califor- 
nia." in  Howard  .1.  Taubenfeld  (editor).  "Controlling  the  Weather:  a  Study  of  Law  and 
Regulatory  Processes,  '  New  York,  Dune  lien,  1970,  pp.  229-2:u  and  pp.  242-24S. 

8  In  Pennsylvania,  townships  are  local  administrative  units  within  counties,  mosth  rural 
in  complexion,  which,  along  with  cities  and  boroughs,  make  up  the  total  area  of  each 
county. 


351 


In  Colorado,  the  Department  of  Natural  Resources  has  sole  author- 
ity to  grant  or  revoke  a  permit.  Nevertheless,  strongly  negative  senti- 
ments expressed  in  a  preference  vote  in  five  counties  of  the  San  Luis 
Valley  were  instrumental  in  the  decision  of  the  department  to  deny  a 
summer  cloud-seeding  permit  in  1973.  Winter  cloud  seeding  has  been 
initiated  in  the  region  subsequently  and  continues  only  with  the  un- 
official yet  very  effective  approval  and  local  control  of  a  citizens  group. 
This  group  was  formed  as  the  result  of  an  agreement  by,  and  includes 
members  from,  both  local  proponents  and  opponents  of  cloud  seeding, 
and  the  group  holds  veto  power  to  suspend  operations  by  majority 
vote. 

Local  projects  have  typically  been  sponsored  by  groups  of  farmers 
or  ranchers,  public  utility  companies,  air  lines  and  airports,  water 
districts,  and  municipalities.  Often  they  have  been  sponsored  and/or 
controlled  at  the  county,  city  or  special  district  level  and  have  been 
funded  at  least  in  part  through  local  tax  levies,  depending  on  the 
authorities  granted  these  jurisdictions  in  particular  States.  In  some 
States,  counties  and  States  have  jointly  funded  local  projects  in  ac- 
cordance with  some  cost-sharing  formula  established  by  statute  or 
agreed  upon  between  the  State  and  local  jurisdictions. 

Tables  6  and  9  in  an  earlier  section  of  this  chapter  49  summarize 
information  on  sponsors  of  U.S.  weather  modification  projects  for 
1975  through  1977.  From  these  data  the  numbers  of  local  public  spon- 
sors are  seen  to  be  33,  29,  and  38,  respectfully,  for  calendar  years  1975, 
1976,  and  1977,  when  the  sponsor  categories  of  community  associations, 
municipal  districts,  cities,  and  counties  are  combined.  "State"  projects 
usually  include  joint  efforts  with  counties  or  groups  of  counties  within 
the  States,  so  that  the  sponsors  so  identified  as  States  in  the  tables 
could  be  further  broken  down  in  some  cases  into  additional  local 
sponsors,  increasing  the  previous  totals.  The  category  "community 
associations"  consists  of  groups  of  local  citizens  within  a  county  or 
group  of  counties,  supported  by  local  taxes  and/or  voluntary  contribu- 
tions. 

Specific  examples  of  local  projects  and  sponsors  are  included  in 
discussions  of  weather  modification  activities  within  particular  States 
in  the  latter  part  of  this  chapter.  In  particular,  table  13,  listing  indi- 
vidual projects  for  the  water  year  1977  (October  1,  1976  through 
September  30,  1977)  in  California  shows  the  variety  of  sponsors, 
public  and  private,  found  in  that  State,  which  has  both  the  greatest 
number  of  sponsors  and  projects  in  the  country.  Tables  16  and  17 
provide  similar  information  for  calendar  years  1975  and  1976  for 
projects  in  the  three- State  area  of  North  and  South  Dakota  and  Min- 
nesota in  the  upper  Middle  West. 

Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Particular  States 

Since  each  of  the  States  is  somewhat  different  from  the  others  in  the 
extent  and  the  diversity  of  involvement  in  weather  modification,  it  is 
difficult  to  give  a  full  account  of  activities  by  the  several  States.  The 
list  of  individuals  in  the  respective  States,  referred  to  in  a  previous 
section  and  found  in  appendix  E,  can  be  used  to  acquire  detailed,  cur- 


See  pp.  345  and  347. 


352 


rent  information  on  activities  within  a  particular  State.  In  addition, 
however,  in  order  to  provide  further  insight  into  the  kinds  of  organi- 
zational structures,  regulatory  activities,  and  operational  and  research 
programs  within  States,  some  case  examples  of  particular  States  are 
discussed  in  the  following  sections.  The  cases  were  selected  on  the  basis 
of  both  availability  of  information  and  the  variety  of  State  activities. 
The  States  discussed  are  California,  Illinois,  Kansas,  North  Dakota. 
South  Dakota,  Utah,  and  Washington. 

CALIFORNIA 

State  weather  modification  law  and  regulations 

The  California  statute  both  encourages  the  development  of  weather 
modification  technology  and  recognizes  the  need  to  regulate  its 
practice.  Chapter  four  of  the  State  water  code,  entitled  "Regulation  of 
Rain-making  and  Rain-prevention,"  passed  in  1953,  states  that: 

The  public  interest,  health,  safety,  welfare,  and  necessity  require  that  scientific 
experimentation  in  the  field  of  artificial  nucleation,  and  that  scientific  efforts  to 
develop,  increase,  and  regulate  natural  precipitation  be  encouraged,  and  that 
means  be  provided  for  the  regulation  and  control  of  interference  by  artificial 
means  with  natural  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in  any  form 
contained  in  the  atmosphere,  within  the  State,  in  order  to  develop,  conserve,  and 
protect  the  natural  water  resources  of  the  State  and  to  safeguard  life  and  prop- 
erty.50 

The  California  Department  of  Water  Resources  is  the  agency  re- 
sponsible for  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  the  water  code  related  to 
weather  modification.  The  law  itself  expresses  in  some  detail  the  means 
by  which  the  regulations  are  to  be  administered.  Licenses  are  required 
and  must  be  obtained  from  the  department  of  water  resources,  each 
application  requiring  specific  information  on  the  education,  experience, 
and  other  qualifications  of  the  individual  or  persons  in  control  of  and 
charged  with  the  operations.  Data  required  with  each  application 
includes : 

The  previous  education,  experience,  and  qualifications  of  the 
applicant,  or,  if  the  applicant  is  other  than  an  individual,  the 
previous  education,  experience,  and  qualifications  of  the  persons 
who  will  be  in  control  of  and  charged  with  the  operations  of  the 
applicant ; 

A  general  description  of  the  operations  which  the  applicant  in- 
tends to  conduct  and  the  method  and  type  of  equipment  the  appli- 
cant proposes  to  use ;  and 

Such  other  information  as  the  department  may  require.51 
Licenses  are  effective  for  a  calendar  year  unless  revoked  or  sus- 
pended and  may  be  renewed  annually.  Prior  to  undertaking  any  oper- 
ation authorized  by  the  license,  under  normal  circumstances  a  notice 
of  intention  to  perform  a  weather  modification  project  must  be  filed 
with  the  Department  of  Water  Resources  and  shall  Ix*  published  in  a 
newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  published  within  the 
county,  or  in  each  of  the  counties,  in  which  the  operations  are  to  be 

*  California  Water  Code.  sec.  400.  (The  California  weather  modification  law  is  reproduced 
in  entirety  in  app.  I),  p.  516.) 
"  Ibid.,  sec.  403. 


353 


conducted.  If  no  newspaper  is  published  within  a  particular  county, 
publication  shall  be  in  a  newspaper  with  a  general  circulation  within 
that  county.  Published  notices  must  include  information  on  the  nature 
and  object  of  intended  operations,  the  person  or  persons  on  whose 
behalf  the  project  is  to  be  performed,  the  area  and  approximate  times 
for  conduct  of  the  operations,  and  the  area  which  may  be  affected  by 
the  project  to  the  extent  that  such  area  can  be  determined  in  advance.52 
The  requirement  for  published  advance  notification  may  be  waived 
in  an  emergency  situation  if  the  operations  appear  to  the  depart- 
ment to  be  desirable  in  aiding  extinguishment  of  fires.  Furthermore, 
at  the  request  of  the  board  of  supervisors  of  a  county  or  of  the  govern- 
ing body  of  a  city  or  a  public  district  in  the  State,  the  department  may 
also  grant  a  licensee  permission  to  undertake  seeding  to  alleviate  a 
drought  emergency,  without  prior  compliance  with  the  need  for  pub- 
lication of  intent;  however,  the  licensee  must  publish  such  notice  as 
soon  as  practicable  after  the  granting  of  permission  for  emergency 
seeding. 

Licensees  are  required  to  maintain  records  of  all  operations,  show- 
ing the  method  and  equipment  used,  times  and  places  of  operations, 
and  the  names  and  addresses  of  all  persons  participating  and  assist- 
ing in  the  operations.  Immediately  following  completion  of  each 
operation  a  report  is  to  be  filed.  An  evaluation  statement  for  each 
operation,  including  estimated  precipitation  gain  or  loss  occurring 
from  the  seeding  activities  and  other  supporting  data,  is  to  be  pre- 
pared and  maintained  by  the  operator,  and  it  is  to  be  submitted  to 
the  department  upon  request.53 

Weather  modification  projects 

Cloud-seeding  projects  have  been  underway  in  California  since  the 
late  1940's,  and  some  projects  sponsored  by  utility  companies  have 
been  continuous  since  the  1950's.  Some  operations  are  carried  out  dur- 
ing the  winter  season  to  increase  winter  snowpack,  whose  runoff  is 
used  for  hydroelectric  power  generation  and  to  augment  water  sup- 
plies. Other  projects  are  designed  to  increase  summer  rainfall  for  a 
variety  of  water  needs  and  for  fighting  forest  fires. 

Fifteen  weather  modification  licenses  were  issued  in  California 
during  calendar  vear  1977,  and  14  projects  were  conducted  within  the 
1977  water  year/October  1,  1976  through  September  30,  1977.54  Table 
13  shows  the  projects  active  in  the  State  during  this  period  along  with 
licensed  operators  who  were  inactive  during  that  year.  Projects  in  the 
table  with  an  "E"  following  the  project  number  were  emergency  pro- 
grams, which  nearly  doubled  the  customary  number  of  annual  proj- 
ects. The  variety  of  public  and  private  clients  sponsoring  opera- 
tional projects  in  the  State  is  seen  in  the  fourth  column.  Note  that, 
while  most  of  the  licensees  in  the  third  column  are  commercial  cloud- 
seeding  firms,  other  licenses  are  granted  to  some  clients  who  provide 
their  own  services  and  one  license  was  given  to  a  university  research 
group  for  participation  in  a  research  project  of  a  U.S.  Federal  agency. 

52  Ibid.,  sees.  402-410. 

53  Ibid.,  sees.  411-412. 

54  State  of  California,  the  Resources  Agency.  Department  of  Water  Resources,  Weather 
Modification  Activities  in  California  ;  Oct.  1,  1976  to  Sept.  30,  1977. 


354 


TABLE  13.— WEATHER  MODIFICATION  PROJECTS  IN  CALIFORNIA:  1977  WATER  YEAR 
[From  California  Department  of  Water  Resources,  1977] 


Project  No. 


License 

No.  Licensee 


Client 


Target  area 


1-77-1. 


l-77-2(E)  

21-77-1  

21-77-2  

21-77-3(E).. 


21-77-4(E).._ 


21-77-5(E). 
21-77-6(E)_ 


22-  77-1. 

23-  77-1. 
23-77-2. 
26-77-1. 


34-77-1. 


44-77  1(E). 


North  American  Weather  Con 

suHants. 
Santa  Barbara  Municipal  Air 

port,  Goleta,  Calif. 
North  American  Weather  Con 

sultants. 


Southern 
Co. 


California  Edison 


Upper  San 
watershed. 


Joaquin  River 


Atmospherics,  Inc 
Calif. 


Fresno, 


.do 


Nevada  Irrigation  District  in 
cooperation    with  Pacific 
Gas  &  Electric  Co. 
Kings    River  Conservation 
District. 

do     Kaweah  Delta  Water  Conser- 

vation District. 
Yolo  County  Flood  Control 
and  Water  Conservation 
District,  Lake  County, 
Sonoma  County,  Mendocino 
County,  and  Pacific  Gas  & 
Electric  Co.,  Yolo  County, 
Solano  County  Flood  Con- 
trol and  Water  Conserva- 
tion District. 


.do   Los  Angeles  Department  of 

Water  and  Power. 


21   do   Kern  County  

21   do..   Desert    Research  Institute, 

University  of  Nevada. 


22 


23 


26 


43 


San  Bernardino  Valley  Munic- 
ipal Water  District,  San 
Bernardino,  Calif. 

Pacific  Gas  &  Electric  Co.,  San 
Francisco,  Calif. 

..do   


San  Bernardino  Valley  Munic- 
ipal Water  District. 


Upper  Middle  Yuba  River  and 
north  side  South  Yuba  River 
above  Spaulding  Dam. 

Upper  Kings  River  watershed. 

Kaweah  River  watershed. 

Clear  Lake,  Indian  Valley 
Reservoir  watersheds  in 
Lake  County  and  added  later 
portions  of  Mendocino 
County  and  that  portion  of 
the  Eel  River  drainage  in 
Lake  County  to  all  of  that 
county.  Portions  of  Yolo 
County  and  the  watershed 
above  Lake  Berryessa  in 
Napa  County. 

East  slopes  of  the  Sierra  from 
southwest  of  Lone  Pine  to 
the  southern  portions  of 
Mono  Basin. 

Kern  River  above  Isabella  Dam. 

Higher  elevations  of  Tahoe 
Basin  and  the  Walker  River 
drainage  basin. 

Upper  Santa  Ana  watershed. 


Pacific  Gas  &  Electric  Co  Lake  Almanor  drainage  basin. 


.do. 


Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  Dis- 
trict, San  Jose,  Calif. 

Envaids  Inc.,  Stockton,  Calif.. 

Desert  Research  Institute  En- 
ergy and  Atmospheric  En- 
vironmental Center,  Uni- 
versity of  Nevada  System, 
Reno,  Nev. 

Sacramento  Municipal  Utility 
District,  Sacramento,  Calif. 

Joe  Warburton,  Desert  Re- 
search Institute,  Reno,  Nev. 

Marin  Municipal  Water  Dis- 
trict, Corte  Madera,  Calif. 

Institute  of  Earth,  Planetary 
and  Life  Sciences,  Los  An- 
geles, Calif. 

University  of  Washington, 
Department  of  Atmospheric 
Science,  Seattle,  Wash. 

Weather  Modification,  Inc., 
Bowman,  N.  Dak. 


45  Mr.  Jack  VanZandt,  Teha- 

chapi,  Calif. 

46  Weather   Consultants,  Inc. 

Santa  Barbara,  Calif. 


Santa  Clara  Valley  Water  Dis- 
trict. 

Licensee  inactive  this  year... 

 do.    


Sacramento  Municipal  Utility 

District. 
Licensee  inactive  this  year 

[see  21-77-6(E)[. 
Licensee  inactive  this  year  


.do. 


Transport  and  diffusion  stud- 
ies for  U.S.  Bureau  of  Rec- 
lamation. 

California  Department  of 
Water  Resources. 


Licensee  inactive  this  year.. 


do. 


Upper  Mokelumne  River  water- 
shed. 
Santa  Clara  County. 

None. 
Do. 

Upper  American  River. 
ISee  21-77-6CE).] 
None. 
Do. 

American  River  Basin. 


Summer  cumulus  program  in 
the  mountains  and  uplands 
of  Mendocino  County  and 
Mariposa  County  northward. 
For  a  short  period  operations 
were  also  carried  out  over 
the  Kern  River  drainage. 

None. 

Do. 


355 


0_        R        E        G  ON 


Figure  3. — California  weather  modification  target  areas,  Oct.  1,  1976,  through 
Sept.  30,  1977.  "E"  following  project  number  indicates  emergency  project. 
(From  California  Department  of  Water  Resources,  1977.) 

The  target  areas,  showing  the  area  of  the  State  covered  by  weather 
modification  projects  during  the  1977  water  year,  are  shown  on  the 
map  in  figure  3.  For  comparison,  the  relatively  smaller  areas  of  the 
State  covered  in  the  two  preceding  years — October  1974  through  Sep- 
tember 1975  and  October  1975  through  September  1976 — are  shown 
in  figure  4.  The  influence  of  the  recent  1976-77  drought  and  attempts 
to  mitigate  it  through  emergency  cloud  seeding  account  for  the  dra- 
matically increased  coverage  for  the  reporting  year  ending  Septem- 
ber 1977.  Seven  projects  were  conducted  during  each  of  these  2  earlier 
years,  compared  with  14  in  1976-77.35 

53  State  of  California,  the  Resources  Agency.  Department  of  Water  Resources.  Weather 
Modification  Activities  in  California  ;  Oct.  1,  1974,  to  Sept.  30,  1975  ;  and  Oct.  1,  197o  to 
Sept.  30,  1976. 


356 


State-sponsored  emergency  projects 

In  July  1977,  the  State  of  California  initiated  its  own  emergency 
cloud-seeding  program,  intended  to  alleviate  drought  conditions. 
Weather  Modification,  Inc.,  of  Bowman,  N.  Dak.,  was  awarded  a  con- 
tract with  the  Department  of  Water  Resources,  who  were  themselves 
the  client  in  this  first  operational  weather  modification  project  ever 
to  be  funded  by  the  State  (see  project  No.  44r-77-l(E)  in  table  13). 
Seeding  was  carried  out  in  the  Kern  River  watershed  and  over  a  wide 
swath  of  the  State  extending  from  the  Merced  River  north  to  the  Ore- 
gon border.  Objectives  of  the  program  were  to  reduce  fire  danger  and 
to  augment  dwindling  water  supplies  in  drought-stricken  northern 
counties  of  the  State.50  This  summer  emergency  seeding  was  totally 
supported  by  State  funds. 

56  Alexander.  George,  "State  Seeks  To  Wring  Rain  From  Clouds,"  Los  Angeles  Times, 
July  2,  1977,  pt.  1,  pp.  1,  17. 


357 


Figure  4. — Target  areas  for  seven  weather  modification  projects  conducted  in 
California  for  (a)  water  year  1975  (Oct.  1,  1974,  through  Sept.  30,  1975),  and 
(b)  water  year  1976  (Oct.  1,  1975,  through  Sept.  30,  1976).  (From  California 
Department  of  Water  Resources,  1975  and  1976.) 

Under  the  Drought  Emergency  Act  of  1977,  the  State  received  $300,- 
000  in  grants  from  the  Bureau  of  Keclamation  of  the  U.S.  Department 
of  the  Interior.57  A  winter  emergency  weather  modification  program 
has  been  initiated  by  the  State,  supported  by  these  funds.  Since  the 
winter  project  was  initiated  since  October  1,  1977,  it  is  not  included  in 


57  See  chapter  5,  p.  266. 


358 

the  projects  listed  in  table  13  or  shown  in  figure  3.  The  contractor  for 
these  operations  is  Atmospherics,  Inc.,  of  Fresno,  Calif.  The  emergency 
funds  from  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  are  also  supporting  two  weather 
modification  studies,  one  on  the  development  of  operational  criteria 
and  the  other  on  project  evaluation.58 

ILLINOIS 

Illinois  is  an  example  of  a  Midwestern  State  in  which  there  has 
been  a  high  degree  of  interest  in  weather  modification,  particularly 
with  regard  to  potential  benefits  to  agriculture  from  increased  rain- 
fall and  from  decreased  hail  damage.  The  State  does  not  finance 
weather  modification  operations,  but  does  encourage  such  activities, 
supported  through  local  private  funding.  The  Illinois  law,  recently 
passed  in  1073.  is  concerned  essentially  with  regulation  of  operations: 
however,  it  is  positive  in  that  it  fosters  weather  modification,  with 
proper  controls  and  protection  guarantees.  The  Illinois  State  water 
survey  has  led  in  endorsing  and  in  evaluating  properly  conducted 
weather  modification  operations  in  the  State  and  has  a  record  of  promi- 
nent and  extensive  activity  across  a  broad  spectrum  of  weather  modi- 
fication research  activities. 

Illinois  iceather  modification,  law  and  its  administration 

The  Illinois  State  water  survey  initiated  efforts  in  1971  to  develop 
and  secure  a  State  law  that  would  both  permit  and  regulate  weather 
modification  activities  in  Illinois.  There  was  no  previous  law  and  such 
a  law  was  considered  to  be  essential  not  only  to  insure  proper  execution 
of  weather  modification  experiments  in  the  State  but  also  ".  .  .  for  the 
general  benefit  of  citizens  of  Illinois  through  encouragement  to  prop- 
erly conducted  activities  and  protection  from  improperly  conducted 
weather  modification  operations."  59 

Efforts  thus  begun  in  October  1971  were  completed  in  September 
1073  with  enactment  of  the  Illinois  weather  modification  control  bill 
and  its  accompanying  appropriation  bill.  It  was  intended  to  be  a 
"model"  law,  reflecting  the  best  aspects  of  similar  legislation  in  other 
States  and  serving  as  a  model  for  future  legislation  in  other  States.00, 61 
Witti  objectives  of  encouraging  weather  modification  operations  and 
research  and  of  minimizing  possible  adverse  effects  of  such  activities, 
the  Illinois  Weather  Modification  Control  Act  contains  three  types 
of  provisions : 

1.  It  establishes  an  institutional  structure  to  deal  with  regula- 
tion of  cloud  seeding  activities ; 

2.  It  contains  substantive  regulatory  provisions  controlling  in- 
tentional atmospheric  manipulation  in  the  State:  and 

3.  It  establishes  basic  rules  of  procedure  according  to  which  the 
regulatory  provisions  will  be  enforced.02 

The  Illinois  law  is  merely  regulatory  and  does  not  authorize  a  State 
government  agency  to  carry  out  weather  modification  operations.  In 

68  Finlayson,  Donald  J.,  private  communication. 

";*  Aekerman.  William  C.,  Stanley  A.  Changnori,  Jr.,  and  Ray  Jay  Davis.  "The  New 
Weather  Modification  l-aw  for  Illinois.  '  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society, 
vol.  55,  No.  7,  July  1974,  p.  745. 

60  Ibid. 

61  The  Illinois  law  (111.  Ann.  Stat.  Oh.  140  3/4,  §  1-32)  in  its  entirety  is  found  along  with 
those  of  other  States  in  app.  D.  pp.  533  to  541. 

*'■-  Ackerman,  Changnon,  and  Davis,  "The  New  Weather  Modification  Law  for  Illinois," 
1974,  p.  747. 


359 


the  process  of  controlling  weather  modification  operations,  three  State 
entities  are  involved: 

1.  The  weather  modification  board  is  composed  of  five  Illinois  resi- 
dents, appointed  by  the  director  of  the  department  of  registration  and 
education,  who  have  qualifications  and  practical  experience  in  agri- 
culture, law,  meteorology,  and  water  resources.  The  board  meets  an- 
ually  and  at  such  times  and  places  it  determines.  The  director  of  the 
department  of  registration  and  education  can  exercise  his  regulatory 
authority  only  upon  recommendation  in  a  written  report  from  the 
majority  of  the  members  of  the  board. 

2.  The  department  of  registration  and  education,  working  through 
advisory  groups  like  the  weather  modification  board,  supervises  most 
of  the  professional  licensing  in  Illinois.  All  formal  documents  required 
by  the  Weather  Modification  Control  Act  are  issued  by  the  depart- 
ment. 

3.  The  State  courts  are  part  of  the  institutional  structure  in  that  per- 
sons adversely  affected  by  weather  modification  are  afforded  a  right  to 
judicial  review  of  final  administrative  decisions  of  the  department  of 
registration  and  education.  The  department  may  also  seek  a  writ  of  in- 
junction to  restrain  repetitious  violations  of  the  act.63 

Regulatory  provisions  of  the  Illinois  law  prohibit  a  person's  en- 
gaging in  weather  modification  activities  (a)  without  both  a  profes- 
sional weather  modification  license  and  a  weather  modification  permit 
for  a  specific  project  or  (b)  in  violation  of  any  term,  condition,  or  limi- 
tation of  such  license  and  permit.  Some  activities  may  be  exempted 
from  license  and  permit  requirements  by  administrative  regulation. 
Such  exemptions  are  granted  for  research  activities  and  for  fire,  frost, 
or  fog  protection,  so  long  as  the  exempted  activities  do  not  interfere 
with  operations  conducted  by  permit.64  The  rules  of  procedure,  estab- 
lished by  the  weather  modification  board  and  the  department  of  regis- 
tration and  education  are  found  in  appendix  M  of  this  report.  Under 
these  procedures  One  permit  was  granted  in  1976  for  a  rain  enhance- 
ment project,  and  three  were  granted  in  1977.65 

Operational  projects 

The  first  permit  for  weather  modification  operations  under  the 
Illinois  law  was  obtained  by  a  group  of  farmers  and  other  interested 
businessmen,  called  Rain,  Inc.,  who  contracted  for  cloud  seeding  serv- 
ices in  a  five-county  area  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State.  This  area 
was  centered  in  Colt  County,  about  45  miles  south  of  the  Champaign- 
Urbana  area.  This  cooperative  voluntary- funded  organization  initiated 
an  aircraft  seeding  program  in  July  1976.  The  program  was  renewed  in 
1977 ;  however,  there  seemed  to  be  less  interest  the  second  season  owing 
to  less  critical  rainfall  shortages.  Evaluation  of  1976  results  by  the  Illi- 
nois State  Water  Survey  showed  that  there  was  an  estimated*12-  to  50- 
percent  rainfall  increase.66 

Another  group  of  farmers  from  McLean  County  in  north  central 
Illinois,  organized  as  Rain  Gain.  Inc..  was  formed  in  June  1977.  and 
contracted  for  weather  modification  operations,  which  began  July  12. 


AU1U. 

85 Posse,  E.  Ray.  member  of  Illinois  weather  modification  board.  Briefing  before  U.S.  De- 
partment of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  13. 
1977. 

66  Schilling.  David.  President.  Rain.  Inc..  briefing  before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Com- 
merce Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Champaign.  111.,  Oct.  13,  1977. 


360 


Rains  were  heavy  during  July,  and  the  operations  were  stopped  on 
August  4.  Costs  for  these  operations  were  estimated  at  about  40  cents 
per  acre.  There  is  a  present  attempt,  along  with  the  State  water 
survey,  to  evaluate  results  of  the  seeding,  and  the  group  is  contemplat- 
ing a  second  season  of  operations  in  1978. 67 

Research  activities 

The  Illinois  State  Water  Survey  initiated  research  into  the  potential 
of  modifying  the  weather  in  the  late  1960'S,  recognizing  the  potential 
for  this  emerging  technology.  In  1970  a  major  research  effort  was 
launched  by  the  survey  in  two  general  aspects  of  the  subject:  (1) 
studies  of  inadvertent  weather  modification  produced  by  cities  and 
industrial  activities,  and  (2)  studies  of  planned  or  intentional  weather 
modification.  In  the  latter  category  the  research  is  intended  to  answer 
the  questions  of  whether  the  weather  can  be  modified  and  whether  it 
can  be  done  beneficially  without  undue  harm.68 

The  survey  has  been  a  national  leader  in  studies  on  planned  weather 
modification.  There  has  been  a  concentrated  interest  in  experiments 
to  determine  the  usefulness  of  weather  modification  in  Illinois  and  else- 
where in  the  Middle  West,  recognizing  that  most  U.S.  weather  modi- 
fication operations  have  been  conducted  in  the  Great  Plains  and  in  the 
Rockies  where  capabilities  to  augment  precipitation  have  at  least  partly 
been  demonstrated.  Thus,  survey  scientists  have  given  considerable 
attention  to  the  design  of  experiments  to  increase  summer  rainfall  and 
to  suppress  hail.  With  some  support  from  the  National  Science  Foun- 
dation (XSF)  they  have  recently  completed  development  of  a  design 
for  a  major  8-year  hail  suppression  experiment  for  Illinois.  The  State 
is  now  ready  to  launch  a  hail  experiment  if  it  is  determined  desirable 
to  do  so.69  Interest  in  hail  suppression  also  led  the  survey  to  join  with 
other  experts  in  performing  an  XSF-sponsored  national-scale  tech- 
nology assessment  of  hail  suppression.70 

In  1968  the  water  survey  also  began  a  project  to  develop  the  design  of 
an  experiment  in  precipitation  modification,  funded  by  the  XSF  and 
the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  A  capability  was  developed  in  numerical 
cloud  modeling,  using  computers ;  and  a  field  program  was  initiated, 
using  meteorological  aircraft  and  radar  for  sampling  clouds  to  deter- 
mine seedability  criteria.  After  a  major  reduction  in  Federal  support 
during  1973  had  curtailed  this  design  project  before  its  completion, 
renewed  support  from  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  has  enabled  survey 
scientists  to  develop  a  design  for  a  rainfall  modification  experiment  in 
the  High  Plains.  They  are  now  prepared  to  resume  design  for  a  warm 
rain  experiment  in  Illinois,  after  completion  of  the  cloud  sampling 
research.71 

Survey  scientists  have  discussed  rainfall  requirements  with  Midwest 
agricultural  interests  and  are  developing  a  plan  for  a  Midwestern  rairi- 

«  Gildersleeve,  Ben.  Briefing  before  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification 
Advisory  Board.  Champaign.  111..  Oct.  13,  1077. 

changnon.  Stanley  A.,  Jr..  "Accidental  and  Planned  Weather  Modification  in  Illinois," 
Water  Resources  Bulletin,  vol.  13,  No.  6,  December  1077,  p.  11  GO. 

80  Ibid.,  p.  1172. 

7"  Changnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr..  Ray  Jay  Davis.  Barbara  C.  Farhar.  J.  Eugene  Haas.  J.  Lore- 
ena  Ivens.  Martin  V.  Jones.  Donald  A.  Klein,  Dean  Mann.  Griffith  M.  Morgan.  Jr.,  Steven  T. 
Sonka,  Earl  R.  Swanson,  C.  Robert  Taylor,  and  Jon  Van  Blokland.  "Hail  Suppression  ;  Im- 
pacts and  Issues."  Urbana,  111..  Illinois  State  Water  Survey,  April  1077.  432  pp.  (A  sum- 
mary of  the  report  has  also  been  published  :  Farhar.  Barbara  C.  Stanley  A.  Changnon.  Jr., 
Farl  R.  Swanson,  Ray  Jay  Davis,  and  J.  Eugene  Haas.  "Hail  Supression  and  Society,"  Ur- 
bana. 111.,  Illinois  State  Water  Survey.  June  1077.  25  pp.) 

71  Changnon,  "Accidental  and  Planned  Weather  Modification  in  Illinois."  1077,  pp.  1172- 
1173. 


361 


fall  modification  experiment,  along  with  representatives  from  agricul- 
tural colleges  in  Midwestern  States  and  from  Federal  Government 
agencies.  When  funding  is  secured  for  this  project,  hopefully  during 
1978,  the  experiment  will  be  initiated ;  it  will  incorporate  both  physical 
and  statistical  assessment  of  cloud  and  rainfall  modifications  as  well 
as  studies  of  public  attitudes  and  economic  and  ecological  impacts  from 
altered  precipitation.72 

In  an  attempt  to  evaluate  precipitation  modification  operations  con- 
ducted during  the  1976  growing  season  in  central  Illinois,  the  survey 
and  the  College  of  Agriculture  at  the  University  of  Illinois  installed  a 
rain  gage  network.  Examination  of  these  data  led  to  a  conclusion  that 
the  seeded  areas  received  12  to  50  percent  more  rainfall ;  however,  the 
differences  could  not  be  established  as  due  to  the  seeding  in  view  of  the 
small  sample  size  (6  rain  days)  .73 

Survey  scientists  have  also  participated  in  a  number  of  experiments 
on  inadvertent  weather  modification,  including  the  METROMEX  in 
the  vicinity  of  St.  Louis  74  and  similar  studies  downwind  of  Chicago 
and  Kansas  City.  They  have  also  studied  effects  on  rainfall  of  the  mas- 
sive irrigation  which  has  been  developed  in  the  Great  Plains  since 
World  War  II.75 

Over  the  past  10  years  the  survey  has  spent  about  $3  to  $4  million  in 
weather  modification  research,  including  both  planned  and  inadvertent 
aspects.  Of  these  funds  about  one-third  was  provided  by  the  State, 
while  the  remainder  has  come  from  various  Federal  agencies.  The  latter 
include  the  National  Science  Foundation,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation, 
and  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency  (EPA).76  The  funds  for 
EPA-supported  research  in  inadvertent  weather  change  are  not  con- 
sidered to  be  weather  modification  research  by  the  EPA,  so  that  agency 
does  not  appear  among  the  Federal  agencies  supporting  weather  modi- 
fication in  chapter  5.77 

KANSAS 

Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act 

In  197-1-  Kansas  leoislature  passed  H.B.  1216,  known  as  the 
Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act,  providing  for  licensing  by  the 
State  of  all  qualified  persons  who  desire  to  engage  in  weather  modifi- 
cation activities  within  the  State  and  requiring  that  a  permit  be  ob- 
tained for  each  specific  activity.78  Responsibility  for  administering 
the  act  is  placed  with  the  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board ;  however, 
the  law  also  requires  the  board  to  appoint  an  advisory  committee  to 
assist  the  board's  executive  director  in  developing  licensing  standards 
and  report  forms  and  to  assist  in  other  areas  as  directed  by  the  board. 
Rules  and  regulations  prepared  by  the  board  and  the  advisory  com- 
mittee specify  how  the  law  is  administered  and  procedures  to  follow 
in  applying  for  licenses  and  permits.79  The  objectives  of  the  rules  and 
regulations  are  to  "encourage  the  development  and  evaluation  of 
weather  modification  technology,  to  protect  the  public  through  the 
requirement  that  operators  .  .  .  possess  certain  basic  qualifications,  and 

72  Ibid.,  p.  1173. 

73  Ibid. 

74  See  chs.  4  and  5  for  a  discussion  of  METROMEX. 

75  Changnon,  "Accidental  and  Planned  Weather  Modification  in  Illinois,"  1977,  pp.  1173- 
1174. 

76  Changnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr.,  briefinjr  before  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modi- 
fication Advisory  Board.  Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  13,  1977. 

77  See  p.  243,  for  list  of  Federal  agencies  reporting  weather  modification  research  pro- 
grams. 

78  The  Kansas  weather  modification  statute  is  reproduced  in  app.  D,  p.  543. 

79  The  rules  and  regulations  are  reproduced  in  app.  M,  p.  683. 


362 


to  establish  procedures  for  the  issuance  of  permits  with  a  minimum 
of  delay  and  to  clarify  administrative  policy."  80 

Research  activities 

Drought  conditions  during  the  spring  of  1972  and  pleas  from  agri- 
cultural interests  in  western  Kansas  to  "do  something  about  it" 
spurred  the  State  to  undertake  plans  for  weather  modification  opera- 
tions. Release  of  $100,000  in  emergency  funds  by  the  legislature  pro- 
vided support  for  cloud  seeding  in  northwestern  Kansas,  and  the  water 
resources  board  was  directed  to  manage  the  operations.  The  board 
contracted  with  the  U.S.  Bureau  of  Reclamation  to  oversee  the  proj- 
ect: however,  prior  to  the  start  of  the  seeding,  the  drought  situation 
improved  and  emphasis  was  shifted  from  drought  relief  to  weather 
modification  research.  Since  1972  all  weather  modification  activities 
conducted  by  the  State  of  Kansas  have  been  experimental.  Such 
experiments  were  conducted  under  the  management  of  the  Bureau  of 
Reclamation  for  9  weeks,  starting  August  5,  1972,  near  Colby,  Kans., 
and  for  an  8- week  period  in  the  late  summer  of  1973  at  Scott  City, 
Kans.  During  a  6-week  period  starting  April  25,  1974,  a  demonstra- 
tion project  was  conducted,  with  the  target  area  again  centered  near 
Scott  City.  This  latter  project  was  carried  out  by  a  commercial  firm 
under  direct  contract  to  the  State  board  and  also  included  funding 
from  four  counties  in  the  target  area.  Results  of  these  experiments, 
called  the  Kansas  Cumulus  projects  (KANCUP),  are  summarized  in 
table  14.81 

TABLE  14—  SUMMARY  OF  THE  KANSAS  CUMULUS  PROJECT  (KANCUP)  EXPERIMENTS 
[From  Kostecki:  Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Kansas,  1972-77,  1977] 


Project 


Objectives 


Assessment 1 


KANCUP  1972,  Aug.  5  to 
Sept.  30  (cost  $95,000, 
fiscal  year  1973). 


KANCUP  1973,  Aug.  lb  to 
Oct.  5  (cost  558,000,  fiscal 
year  1974). 


KANCUP  1974,  Apr.  5  to 
June  8  (cost  $54,000,  fiscal 
year  1974). 


Assuming  technology  works,  seed  for 
rain  increase;  experiment  with  both 
silver  iodide  (Agl)  and  hygroscopic 
materials  (salt);  test  ground  release 
of  materials;  inform  general  public 
about  project  and  technology. 


Verify  computer  models  of  cloud  proc- 
esses; seed  selectively  with  Agl  and 
salt;  assess  use  of  local  pilots  and 
aircraft;  inform  general  public  about 
project  and  technology. 


Assess  minimum  operational  require- 
ments; seed  with  Agl  and  salt  using 
randomized  controls;  evaluate  char- 
acter and  frequency  of  opportunities 
in  spring  compared  to  summer; 
infcrm  general  public  about  project 
and  technology. 


Opportunities  difficult  to  predict  and  recognize; 
positive,  predicted  response  to  Agl  on  2  of  16 
days  (20  percent  of  seeded  cells);  salt  seeding 
only  occasionally  encouraging;  moderate 
response  on  only  1  of  11  days  (10  percent  of 
seeded  cells);  ground-based  seeding  unre- 
liable; not  enough  attention  given  to  control 
clouds. 

Models  helpful;  seeding  frequently  produced 
predicted  response;  positive,  predicted  re- 
sponse to  Agl  on  7  of  14  days  (42  percent  of 
seeded  cells);  however,  marginal  response  on 
5  of  the  same  7  days;  salt  seeding  on  only  2 
days;  moderate  response  from  33  percent  of 
seeded  cells;  design  and  instrumentation 
inadequate;  local  pilots  need  experienced 
guidance  to  be  effective. 

Selective  seeding  sometimes  produced  desired 
response;  positive  response  to  Agl  on  8  of  13 
days;  however,  marginal  response  on  6  of  the 
same  8  days;  moderate  resoonse  to  salt  seed- 
ing on  1  of  2  days;  springtime  cloud  systems 
usually  more  organized  but  seedabilily  less 
predictable;  design  and  instrumentation 
inadequate  for  remaining  uncertainties. 


KANCUP  1974  assessment  done  by  KWRB  personnel,  following  criteria  given  in  KANCUP  1972  and  1973  final  reports. 


*°  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board,  The  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act;  State  statutes, 
rules,  and  regulations  plus  applicable  forms.  State  of  Kansas.  Topeka,  1!)77.  p.  ii. 

«  Kostecki.  Donald  F..  "Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Kansas;  1972-77."  bulletin 
No.  22,  special  report  to  the  Governor  and  legislature,  State  of  Kansas,  Topeka.  1977, 
pp.  1-3. 


363 


Since  quantitative  data  from  KANCUP  experiments  were  limited 
by  time  and  funding,  the  board  concluded  that  further  projects  of 
similar  type  and  refinement  would  not  likely  increase  understanding 
of  weather  modification  science  and  technology.  Consequently,  start- 
ing in  fiscal  year  1975  all  appropriations  have  been  directed  to  studies 
on  economic,  social,  legal,  and  environmental  impacts  of  weather 
modification  wilthin  the  State.82 

Earlier  in  this  report  plans  and  research  activities  to  date  under 
the  Bureau  of  Reclamation's  High  Plains  Project  (HIPLEX)  were 
discussed.83  One  of  three  sites  selected  for  HIPLEX  is  in  the  vicinity 
of  Goodland  and  Colby,  Kans.,  where  limited  field  activities  were  be- 
gun in  1975,  but  where  seeding  experiments  are  to  begin  in  1979.  The 
States  of  Kansas,  Colorado,  and  Nebraska  have  signed  a  Memoran- 
dum of  Understanding,  agreeing  to  cooperate  with  the  Bureau  of 
Reclamation  in  the  planning  and  conduct  of  HIPLEX.  Funding  con- 
tributed to  the  project  by  the  States  under  this  agreement  is  sum- 
marized in  table  11  in  chapter  5.84  Under  this  agreement  the  Kansas 
Water  Resources  Board  will  (1)  establish  and  operate  a  data  gather- 
ing network  in  the  Colby,  Kans.,  area  to  provide  data  for  agricultural, 
environmental,  and  climatological  research  studies  and  to  moni- 
tor the  effects  of  cloud  seeding;  (2)  perform  a  wide  range  of  associ- 
ated studies  including  investigation  of  potential  crop  yield  increases 
and  related  economic  benefits,  the  effects  of  additional  moisture  on 
insects,  crop  disease  vectors,  incremental  runoff  and  soil  infiltration, 
and  study  of  social  attitudes  and  acceptance  of  cloud-seeding  tech- 
nology; and  (3)  perform  research  to  develop  criteria  for  guiding 
operational  cloud-seeding  decisions,  including  the  initiation,  suspen- 
sion, and  termination  of  seeding.  For  its  part,  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion will  perform  the  atmospheric  research  and  field  tests,  including 
(1)  design  of  the  observation  and  cloud-seeding  experiments,  (2)  proc- 
essing and  analysis  of  data  to  evaluate  seeding  effects  and  develop 
and  verify  cloud  models,  and  (3)  coordination  of  research  activities  at 
the  Colby-Goodland  site  with  the  overall  HIPLEX  project.85 

Pursuant  to  the  cooperative  agreement  with  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion, the  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board  has  initiated  several  studies. 
Completed  and  on-going  projects  sponsored  by  the  board  since  the 
latter  part  of  fiscal  year  1974  are  listed  in  table  15. 


Table  15. 


-Kansas  research  projects  related  to  weather  modification  (source 
Kostecki,  1977) 


Title 

A  Survey  of  the  Radar  Echo  Population  over  the 

western  Kansas  High  Plains. 
Characteristics  of  Cumulus  Cloud  Fields  over 

western  Kansas. 

The  Measurement  of  Silver  Concentration  in 
Rainwater  in  Kansas. 

A  Comprehensive  Study  of  the  Effects  of  Alter- 
ing the  Precipitation  Pattern  on  the  Economy 
and  Environment  of  Kansas. 

Data  Collection  and  Analysis  


Contractor 

Department  of  Physics,  Kan- 
sas State  University. 

Department  of  Geography- 
Meteorology,  University  of 
Kansas. 

Department  of  Geology,  Uni- 
versity of  Kansas. 

Kansas  Agricultural,  Experi- 
ment Station. 


Various  Federal,  State,  and 
local  agencies. 


82  Ibid.,  p.  2. 

83  See  ch.  5,  p.  258. 

84  See  p.  263. 

85  Kostecki,  "Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Kansas 


1972-77,"  1977,  p.  5. 


364 


Operational  activities 

Since  the  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act  has  been  enacted  there 
has  been  only  one  license  and  permit  sought  and  granted  annually. 
During  the  period  April  15  through  September  15  in  each  of  the 
recent  3  years  the  Muddy  Road  project  has  been  conducted  in  west- 
central  and  southwest  Kansas,  under  the  auspices  of  the  Western  Kan- 
sas Groundwater  Management  District  No.  1.  Funds  have  been  al- 
most completely  provided  by  groundwater  management  districts  and 
counties  in  the  area.  In  1975  the  Muddy  Road  I  project  conducted 
cloud  seeding  for  rain  increase  on  39  days  and  for  hail  suppression  on 
27  days.  Total  cost  for  the  5-month  seeding  period  was  $80,000.  The 
Muddy  Road  II  project  in  1976  included  47  days  of  seeding  for  rain 
enhancement  and  25  days  for  hail  suppression,  at  a  cost  of  $153,000, 
about  $40,000  of  which  was  granted  to  the  project  by  the  Ozarks  Re- 
gional Commission.  During  1977  the  Muddy  Road  III  project  in- 
cluded seeding  for  rain  on  50  days,  during  28  of  which  hail  seeding 
was  also  conducted ;  there  were  also  7  days  for  exclusive  hail  suppres- 
sion. The  $180,000  for  operating  expenses  during  1977  was  raised  by 
the  counties  and  groundwater  districts  but  these  funds  were  partly 
reimbursed  in  September  through  a  grant  under  the  Emergency 
Drought  Act  of  1977.86' 87 

The  Kansas  law  does  not  require  evaluation  of  results  of  a  weather 
modification  project;  however,  the  rules  and  regulations  do  require 
that  a  final  report  be  submitted  within  90  days  following  the  close  of 
the  project.  Information  required  includes  daily  records  during  the 
project  period  of  starting  and  ending  times  and  location  of  seeding, 
the  type  of  clouds  seeded,  and  the  purpose  of  the  seeding  activity,  as 
well  as  the  permit  holder's  interpretation  of  the  project  effects  in  com- 
parison with  those  anticipated  in  the  permit  application.  This  eval- 
uation is,  generally  speaking,  qualitative,  based  on  the  project  meteor- 
ologists' recollections  of  cloud  response  observed  by  radar  during 
seeding.  Effects  of  the  Muddy  Road  projects  have  been  evaluated  in 
this  manner,  with  the  conclusion  that  additional  rain  was  obtained 
and  crop  damage  was  reduced  by  the  seeding.  In  order  to  assist  in  a 
more  quantitative  evaluation,  the  Muddy  Road  project  has  been 
provided  by  the  State  Water  Resources  Board  with  a  computer  term- 
inal linked*  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation's  Environmental  Data  Net- 
work.88 Products  from  the  data  network  provide  the  project  meteor- 
ologist with  daily  decision  criteria  for  cloud  seeding  and  could  also 
be  used  to  evaluate  operating  procedures  and  effectiveness  of  seeding 
if  additional  information  were  available.  Due  to  lack  of  staff  and  lack 
of  sufficient  data  for  an  adequate  evaluation,  detailed  evaluation  of 
the  Muddy  Road  projects  has  not  yet  been  conducted.  However,  an 
independent  evaluation  of  the  three  seasons  of  cloud  seeding  in  Mud- 
dy Road  is  currently  being  attempted  on  all  available  data,  using  funds 
provided  under  the  Emergency  Drought  Act  of  1977.89 

Emergency  Drought  Act  of  1977 

In  October  1977.  the  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board  was  awarded  a 
grant  of  $300,000  from  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  under  the  provisions 
of  the  Emergency  Drought  Act  of  1977.90  A  limitation  of  this  grant 

wfiSstecki!'  ^Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Kansas;  1972-77,"  1977,  pp.  10-11. 

»  K^Steckt,' 'leather  Modification  Activities  in  Kansas  ;  1972-77,"  1977,  pp.  11-12. 
90  See  ch.  5,  p.  267. 


365 


was  that  all  funds  had  to  be  expended  by  January  31,  1978;  conse- 
quently, the  grant  was  used  primarily  to  purchase  equipment  for  future 
summer  seeding  operation  measurements  and  evaluations.  A  portion 
of  the  fimds  has  been  used  to  commission  an  evaluation  of  the  opera- 
tional projects  under  Muddy  Road,  conducted  by  local  groundwater 
districts  and  counties  in  western  Kansas.91 

Following  an  exchange  of  letters  between  the  board  and  the  Bureau 
of  Reclamation,  the  grant,  under  Public  Law  95-18,  was  approved  with 
the  following  conditions  and  limitations : 

1.  The  request  was  increased  from  the  $218,600  to  $300,000  because  of 
the  probability  of  an  understimation  of  equipment  costs.  (This  total 
was  subsequently  adjusted  to  $293,000.) 

2.  Expenditures  of  grant  funds  by  the  State  were  to  be  limited  to 
equipment  purchased  and  available  for  operational  use  on  or  before 
January  31,  1978. 

3.  All  funds  not  expended  by  January  31,  1978,  were  to  be  returned 
to  the  U.S.  Government. 

4.  In  the  event  that  the  Kansas  legislature  did  not  appropriate  funds 
to  implement  the  cloud-seeding  program,  or  that  such  funds  were  not 
provided  by  other  non-Federal  sources  for  use  during  the  1978  irriga- 
tion season,  all  equipment  purchased  with  the  grant  funds  were  to  be  re- 
turned to  the  U.S.  Government.92 

Of  the  total  funds  granted,  $22,000  was  used  to  reimburse  sponsors 
of  the  operational  cloud-seeding  program  in  Western  Kansas  (Muddy 
Road),  for  the  cost  of  operations  during  September  1977.  The  evalua- 
tion of  the  operational  programs  conducted  during  the  1975, 1976,  and 
1977  seasons  was  contracted  for  $27,000.  The  remaining  expenditures 
were  for  repair  and  replacement  of  equipment  or  purchase  of  new 
equipment  for  use  within  Groundwater  Management  District  No.  1  or 
for  general  use-  by  the  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board  in  the  future.93 

NORTH  DAKOTA 

Weather  modification  law  and  administration  of  regulations 

The  State  of  North  Dakota  is  active  in  the  encouragement  and  the 
regulation  of  weather  modification  projects.  As  stated  in  the  following 
excerpt  from  the  State  law.  North  Dakota  claims  ownership  of  all  water 
acquired  within  its  boundaries  through  weather  modification  activities : 

Tn  order  that  the  State  may  share  to  the  fullest  extent  in  the  benefits 
already  gained  through  fundamental  research  and  investigation  on  new 
and  improved  means  for  predicting,  influencing,  and  controlling  the  weather, 
for  the  best  interest,  general  welfare,  health,  and  safety  of  all  the  people  of  the 
State,  and  to  provide  proper  safeguards  in  applying  the  measures  for  use  in  con- 
nection therewith  in  order  to  protect  life  and  property,  it  is  deemed  necessary  and 
hereby  declared  that  the  State  of  North  Dakota  claims  its  sovereign  right  to  use 
the  moisture  contained  in  the  clouds  and  atmosphere  within  the  sovereign  State 
boundaries.  All  water  derived  as  a  result  of  weather  modification  operations  shall 
be  considered  a  part  of  North  Dakota's  basic  water  supply  and  all  statutes,  rules, 
and  regulations  applying  to  natural  precipitation  shall  also  apply  to  precipitation 
resulting  from  cloud  seeding.94 

01  Kostecki.  "Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Kansas  ;  1972-77,"  1977.  p.  14. 

92  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board,  final  report ;  Emergency  Drought  Act  (Contract  No. 
State-07-70-X0017),  (preliminary  draft),  Topeka,  Feb.  3,  1978,  p.  2. 

93  Ibid.,  pp.  6-8. 

94  North  Dakota  Century  Code,  ch.  2-07.  "Weather  Modification.  Sec.  2-07-01.  Ownership 
of  Water."  (Pertinent  sections  of  the  North  Dakota  Century  Code,  dealing  with  weather 
modification,  are  reproduced  in  app.  D,  p.  573.) 


34-857  O  -  79  -  26 


366 


The  policy  of  the  State  toward  weather  modification  is  summarized 
as  follows : 

The  legislative  assembly  finds  that  weather  modification  affects  the  public 
health,  safety,  and  welfare,  and  that,  properly  conducted,  weather  modification 
operations  can  improve  water  quality  and  quantity,  reduce  losses  from  weather 
hazards,  and  provide  economic  benefits  for  the  people  of  the  State.  Therefore,  in 
the  public  interest,  weather  modification  shall  be  subject  to  regulation  and  con- 
trol, and  research  and  development  shall  be  encouraged.  In  order  to  minimize  pos- 
sible adverse  effects,  weather  modification  operations  shall  be  carried  on  with 
proper  safeguards,  and  accurate  information  shall  be  recorded  concerning  such 
operations  and  the  benefits  obtained  therefrom  by  the  people  of  the  State.05 

North  Dakota  encourages  weather  modification  research  and  develop- 
ment through  its  laws  and  regulations  and  through  State-supported 
research  projects ;  however,  there  is  also  a  fairly  well-developed  scheme 
for  regulation  and  control  of  operational  activities.  State  law  also  per- 
mits local  jurisdictions  to  raise  funds  to  support  local  weather  modifica- 
tion operations,  in  which  the  State  shares  funding. 

Regulation  of  weather  modification  activities  takes  place  to  some  ex- 
tent through  application  of  certain  provisions  of  environmental  and 
aviation  laws;  however,  there  are  specific  portions  of  the  North  Dakota 
Century  Code  that  are  directly  applicable.96  Control,  regulation,  and 
coordination  of  weather  modification  projects,  through  the  issuance 
of  licenses  and  permits  and  promulgation  of  rules  and  regulations,  is 
vested  in  the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board,  which  oper- 
ates under  the  direction  and  supervision  of  the  State's  aeronautics 
commission.  The  board  is  composed  of  the  director  of  the  aeronautics 
commission,  a  representative  of  the  environmental  section  of  the  State 
department  of  health,  the  State  engineer  of  the  water  conservation  dis- 
trict, and  seven  other  members,  appointed  by  the  Grovernor,  one  from 
each  of  seven  lists  of  three  nominees  given  to  him  by  the  weather  modi- 
fication authorities  from  seven  districts  in  the  State.  The  seven  districts 
are  comprised  of  geographical  groupings  of  the  State's  53  counties.97 

The  powers  and  duties  of  the  board  include : 

1.  Authority  to  appoint  an  executive  secretary  to  serve  at  the 
board's  discretion  and  to  perform  such  duties  as  assigned  by  the 
board. 

2.  Authority  to  employ  such  a  staff  as  is  necessary  to  carry  out  the 
provisions  of  the  law. 

3.  Preparation  of  reasonable  rules  and  regulations  concerning  li- 
censing and  permits ;  standards  and  instructions  governing  operations, 
monitoring,  and  evaluation;  and  recordkeeping  and  reporting  of 
activities. 

4.  Authority  to  contract  for  weather  modification  operations;  with 
the  requirement  that  the  board  must  also  cany  on  monitoring  and 
evaluation  activities  in  connection  with  such  operations. 

5.  Authority  to  order  operators  whose  activities  are  in  violation  of 
the  law  to  cease  and  desist  from  further  operations. 

6.  Cooperation  and  contracting  with  Federal,  local,  and  State  agen- 
cies whose  activities  are  similar  to  the  work  of  the  board  and  are  con- 
sistent with  the  intent  and  purpose  of  the  State  law.  The  board  may 
also,  in  accordance  with  the  law,  accept  grants  or  services  from  com- 
as i 1  ill.  sec  2  "7  01.1,  "Declaration  of  Policy  and  Purpose." 

80  See  app.  D,  p.  573. 

07  North  Dakota  Century  Code,  sees.  2-07-02.1,  2-07-02.2,  and  2-07-02.3. 


367 


missions,  organizations,  agencies,  or  persons  and  use  such  funds  or 
services  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  the  law. 

7.  Authority  to  administer  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  the  law. 

8.  Maintain  interstate  contact  with  bordering  States  and  provinces 
for  the  purposes  of  coordinating  interstate  weather  modification  proj- 
ects. North  Dakota  is  a  member  of  the  North  American  Interstate 
Weather  Modification  Council,  through  which  the  board  attempts  to 
provide  an  input  to  such  Federal  weather  modification  laws  and  regu- 
lations which  may  be  enacted  and  impact  on  North  Dakota.98 

In  addition  to  the  responsibilities  and  authorities  listed  above,  based 
upon  the  State  law,  the  Governor  of  North  Dakota  has  also  charged 
the  boa  rd  with  the  following  tasks : 

1.  Assure  that  operations  are  concerned  with  the  health,  safety,  and 
welfare  of  the  public. 

2.  Make  certain  that  research  and  operational  aspects  of  weather 
modification  activities  are  concerned  with  improvement  of  water  qual- 
ity and  distribution  as  well  as  quantity. 

3.  Insure  that  the  weather  modification  program  is  seriously  con- 
'cerned  with  reduction  of  losses  from  such  weather  hazards  as  severe 

storms,  excessive  rainfall,  and  hail. 

4.  Guarantee  that  the  program  is  designed  to  improve  both  the 
social  and  economic  benefits  to  all  segments  of  the  State's  population. 

5.  Assure  that  all  activities  are  prefaced  with  appropriate  technical 
planning  and  scientific  research." 

Licenses  are  required  for  weather  modification  operations  in  North 
Dakota,  and  for  each  project  a  permit  must  be  obtained.  Rules  of 
eligibility  for  licensees  and  procedures  for  application  for  licenses  and 
permits,  in  accordance  with  the  State  law,  are  detailed  in  "Rules  and 
Regulations  Relating  to  Weather  Modification  Operations,"  published 
by  the  Weather  Modification  Board.1  Application  for  a  license  must 
include  information  on  the  applicant's  former  record  of  applications 
elsewhere ;  previous  instances  of  refusal,  suspension,  or  revocation  of 
a  license ;  and  a  statement  of  qualifications  for  individuals  designated 
to  be  in  control  of  operations,  including :  education,  professional  mem- 
berships, professional  certificates  or  licenses,  experience,  publications 
and  patents,  and  professional  references  who  will  attest  to  the  appli- 
cant's character.  Applicants  meeting  minimum  requirements  and  ap- 
proved by  the  board  are  granted  licenses  to  conduct  weather  modi- 
fication operations  in  North  Dakota  for  1  calendar  year;  however, 
licenses  may  be  renewed  annually  upon  reapplication  and  board  ap- 
proval. Causes  for  which  the  board  may  suspend,  revoke,  or  refuse  to 
renew  a  license  include  incompetency,  dishonest  practice,  false  or 
fraudulent  information  in  obtaining  a  license  or  permit,  failure  to 
comply  with  provisions  of  the  weather  modification  laws  or  with 
rules  promulgated  by  the  board,  and  violation  of  any  permit  or  permit 
condition.2 


98  Rose.  R.  Lynn  (executive  secretary  of  the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board). 
Testimony  before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board, 
Grand  Forks,  N.  Dak.,  Aug.  27,  1977. 

69  Ibid. 

1  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board.  "Rules  and  Regulations  Relating  to  Weather 
Modification  Operations"  (published  in  a  booklet  along  with  rules  of  practice  and  procedure 

ertaining  to  hearings  before  the  board,  adopted  July  1.  1976  ;  and  North  Dakota  Century 
ode.  chapter  2-07,  weather  modification,  SL-75,  5i  pp.  The  rules  and  regulations  relat- 
ing to  weather  modification  operations  are  reproduced  in  app.  M,  p.  691.) 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  5-7. 


368 


Permits  are  required  for  each  project  to  be  conducted  by  a  licensee 
and  may  be  issued  following  satisfactory  application  for  a  permit, 
public  comment  and  possible  hearings,  recommendation  by  the  direc- 
tor of  the  Weather  Modification  Board,  and  final  action  by  the  board. 
Information  accompanying  the  application  must  include  the  appli- 
cant's Xorth  Dakota  license  number ;  data  on  any  previous  suspension, 
revocation,  or  refusal  of  permits;  registration  to  do  business  in  North 
Dakota;  registration  of  pilots  and  aircraft  with  the  North  Dakota 
Aeronautics  Commission;  evidence  of  financial  responsibility;  and  a 
complete  description  of  the  operational  plan,  which  includes: 

1.  The  nature  and  object  of  the  operation ; 

2.  The  legal  description  of.  and  a  map  showing  the  operations 
area  and  the  target  area; 

3.  The  approximate  starting  date  of  the  operation  and  its  an- 
ticipated duration ; 

•i.  The  kind  of  seeding  agent  (s)  intended  for  use  and  the  antici- 
pated rate  of  their  use ; 

5.  A  list  of  equipment  which  will  be  used  and  the  method (s)  of 
seeding  for  which  they  will  be  used ; 

6.  An  emergency  shutdown  procedure,  which  states  conditions 
under  which  operations  will  be  suspended  because  of  possible  dan- 
ger to  the  public  health,  safety,  and  welfare  or  to  the  environ- 
ment ; 

7.  The  means  by  which  the  operation  plans  will  be  iumlemented 
and  carried  out,  such  as  the  location  of  the  main  operational  office 
and  any  other  offices  used  in  connection  with  the  operation :  the 
location  of  ground  equipment  such  as  seeding  generators,  radar, 
and  evaluation  instrumentation ;  the  number  and  kinds  of  aircraft 
which  will  be  used ;  and  the  extent  to  which  weather  data  will  be 
made  available  to  the  licensees  and  other  personnel  carrying  out 
the  project ;  and 

8.  How  conduct  of  the  operation  will  interact  with  or  affect 
other  weather  modification  operations.3 

The  board  gives  notice  of  its  consideration  of  a  particular  permit 
application  and  allows  20  days  for  public  comment  on  the  proposed 
project.  Upon  receiving  objection  or  on  its  own  motion,  the  board 
may  conduct  a  hearing  after  at  least  10  more  days  of  further  notice 
iu  a  newspaper  circulated  in  the  county  where  the  notice  of  considera- 
tion  was  first  published.  Within  45  days  after  close  of  the  comment 
period  the  board  takes  action  to  approve  or  disapprove  a  permit  re- 
quest, taking  into  consideration  recommendations  from  the  director 
of  the  board  and  testimony  received  at  the  hearing.  The  board  may 
attach  conditions  which  it  deems  appropriate  to  permits  which  it  other- 
wise approves.  Such  conditions  may  include  modifications  or  restric- 
tions to  methods  and  times  of  operation,  change  of  target  and  opera- 
tions areas,  safety  precautions,  and  recordkeeping.  Permits  may  be 
suspended,  revoked,  or  modified  if  the  board  perceives  that  such  action 
is  necessary,  either  on  the  basis  of  noncompliance  with  conditions  of 
the  permit  by  the  operator  or  the  general  welfare  of  the  people  of  the 
State.  Permits  expire  on  December  31  of  the  year  in  which  they  are 
issued  and  may  not  be  renewed.4 

The  Weather  Modification  Board,  under  rules  which  they  are  to 


3  Ibid.,  pp.  8-9. 
*  Ibid.,  pp.  9-10. 


369 


publish,  may  exempt  the  following  activities  from  permit  and  license 
requirements : 

1.  Research  and  development  in  weather  modification  conducted  by 
the  State,  political  subdivisions  of  the  State,  colleges  and  universities 
of  the  State,  agencies  of  the  Federal  Government,  or  bona  fide  research 
corporations. 

2.  Weather  modification  operations  of  an  emergency  nature  taken 
against  fire,  frost,  or  fog. 

Such  exempted  activities  are  to  be  conducted  in  such  a  way  that  they 
will  not  unduly  interfere  with  weather  modification  projects  conducted 
under  a  permit.5 

There  is  also  another  statute  provision  in  North  Dakota  which  en- 
ables the  State  to  suspend  weather  modification  activities  if  precipita- 
tion enhancement  could  contribute  to  the  severity  of  a  disaster  such  as 
a  flood.  This  provision,  which  supersedes  authorities  given  to  the  board 
to  issue  permits  in  times  of  such  disasters,  states  that : 

The  Division  of  Disaster  Emergency  services  shall  keep  continuously  apprised 
of  weather  conditions  which  present  danger  of  precipitation  or  other  climatic 
activity  severe  enough  to  constitute  a  disaster.  If  the  division  determines  that 
precipitation  that  may  result  from  weather  modification  operations,  either  hy 
itself  or  in  conjunction  with  other  precipitation  or  climatic  conditions  or  activity, 
would  create  or  contribute  to  the  severity  of  a  disaster,  it  shall  direct  the  officer 
or  agency  empowered  to  issue  permits  for  weather  modification  operations  to 
suspend  the  issuance  of  the  permits.  Thereupon,  no  permits  may  be  issued  until 
the  division  informs  the  officer  or  agency  that  the  danger  has  passed.8 

The  rules  and  regulations  disseminated  by  the  weather  modification 
board  require  the  keeping  of  records  and  the  submission  of  reports. 
Permittees  must  complete  and  retain  daily  logs  and  monthly  sum- 
maries for  the  activities  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus 
used  during  an  operation,  obtain  and  retain  copies  of  all  daily  precipi- 
tation records  available  for  the  target  area  from  the  National  Weather 
Service,  keep  a  roster  of  the  names  and  addresses  of  all  employees 
participating  in  an  operation  for  which  a  permit  has  been  issued,  and 
permit  duly  authorized  agents  of  the  board  to  inspect  any  equipment 
and  records  required.  Persons  conducting  projects  exempted  from 
permit  requirements  by  the  board  must  maintain  all  of  the  same  kinds 
of  records  required  of  permittees.7 

Within  10  days  after  the  conclusion  of  each  calendar  month  permit- 
tees must  submit  a  written  report  to  the  board,  including  the  following 
information : 

1.  A  copy  of  the  monthly  summary  record  of  activity  for  each 
unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus  used  in  the  operations; 

2.  A  copy  of  the  roster  of  all  names  and  addresses  of  employees 
participating  in  the  operations; 

3.  A  copy  of  the  Federal  interim  activity  report  filed  for  that 
month  with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administra- 
tion, in  accordance  with  rules  adopted  under  the  authority  of 
Public  Law  92-205  8 ;  and 

-i.  A  narrative  account  of  the  manner  in  which  operations  dur- 
ing the  month  did  not  conform  to  the  operational  plan  filed  with 
the  permit  application. 


5  North  Dakota  Century  Code.  sec.  2-07-03.1. 

6  North  Dakota  Century  Code.  sec.  37-17.1-15. 

7  Nort1-  Dakota  Weather  Mortification  Board.  "Rules  and  Regulations  Relating  to  Weather 
Modification  Operations,"  pp.  11-12. 

8  See  ch.  5,  p.  232, 


370 


Within  30  days  after  final  completion  of  the  operation,  a  permittee 
must  file  a  final  report  with  the  board  which  is  to  include  (1)  copies 
of  the  daily  logs  on  usage  of  units  of  apparatus  and  of  the  total  usage 
for  each  unit  for  the  entire  operational  period,  (2)  a  copy  of  the  final 
Federal  activity  report  filed  with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmos- 
pheric Administration,  and  (3)  a  narrative  account  of  the  manner 
in  which  the  operation  did  not  conform  to  the  operational  plan  filed 
with  the  permit  application.9 

Within  60  days  after  completion  of  an  operation,  the  permittee 
must  file  with  the  board  a  narrative  evaluation  of  the  operation.  Data 
in  this  report  is  to  be  assembled  in  conformance  with  the  evaluation 
plan  submitted  with  the  permit  application.  The  board  may  choose  to 
require  all  or  any  of  these  reports  to  be  filed  by  persons  conducting 
weather  modification  projects  excluded  from  permit  requirements.10 

Authority  and  organization  for  local  projects 

In  1965  the  North  Dakota  legislature  enacted  a  law,11  which  author- 
ized electors  of  townships  within  the  State  to  levy  taxes  for  weather 
modification  activities,  if  approved  by  a  majority  vote  at  annual  town- 
ship meetings.  This  action,  however,  did  not  stimulate  uniform  cloud 
seeding  projects  and  resulted  in  a  checkerboard  pattern  of  participat- 
ing townships  over  the  State.  In  the  same  year  the  legislature  enacted 
chapter  2-07  of  the  State  code,12  authorizing  boards  of  county  com- 
missioners to  levy  up  to  2  mills  on  net  taxable  valuation  of  property 
in  the  county  for  a  weather  modification  fund,  upon  majority  approval 
in  a  county  wide  election.  No  counties  are  known  to  have  taken  ad- 
vantage of  this  provision,  and  the  legislature  amended  chapter  2-07 
in  1969  to  provide  for  county  weather  modification  authorities,  which 
can  request  the  board  of  county  commissioners  to  levy  up  to  2  mills 
for  cloud-seeding  purposes.  Seven  counties  used  this  provision  for  the 
1970  season,  and  10  additional  authorities  were  created  in  1973  and 
1974  as  dry  summers  brought  about  more  interest.13 

North  Dakota  law  specifies  that  the  county  authorities  are  created 
for  a  10-year  period,  either  by  petition  or  by  countywide  election.  The 
17  authorities  established  through  1975  were  all  formed  on  the  basis 
of  petitions  containing  signatures  of  at  least  51  percent  of  voting  resi- 
dents in  the  county.  When  two  counties  included  a  question  on  crea- 
tion of  an  authority  in  county  elections  in  1976,  both  attempts  failed. 
The  law  also  provides  for  repeal  of  authorities  through  similar  pro- 
cedures, and  opposition  groups  succeeded  in  obtaining  signatures  of 
at  least  51  percent  of  the  voters  on  petitions  repealing  authorities  in 
six  counties  during  the  winter  of  1976-77.14 

Amendments  to  the  North  Dakota  weather  modification  law  (Cen- 
tury Code,  chapter  2-07)  passed  by  the  legislature  during  1975  re- 
quired the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board  to  establish 
weather  modification  districts  and  an  advisory  committee  for  each 

9  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board,  '  Rules  and  Regulations  Relating  to  Weather 
Modification  Operations,"  pp.  12-13. 

10  Ihid..  p.  13. 

11  North  Dakota  Century  Code.  sec.  58-03-07,  powers  of  electors. 

]-  North  Dakota  Century  Code,  ch.  2-07,  weather  modification. 

"Schock,  Martin  R.,  "Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Nort*>  Dakota.  South  Dakota, 
and  Minnesota  from  19*53  Through  1976,"  University  of  North  Dakota.  Department  of  Avia- 
tion, Grand  Forks.  N.  Dak..  June  1077  (sponsored  by  U.S  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bu- 
reau of  Reclamation,  Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management,  HIPLEX 
program  ) .  ]>.  5. 

"Ibid.,  p.  6. 


371 


district.  Seven  such  districts  have  been  formed  on  the  basis  of  clusters 
of  counties  having  authorities,  although  all  53  counties  are  assigned 
to  one  of  the  seven  districts.  Each  county  authority,  with  five  persons 
managing  the  program  from  the  county  level,  sets  up  annual  program 
objectives,  requests  funds  from  the  county  commission,  and  holds  an 
annual  meeting.  The  multicounty  districts  then  form  the  second  level 
of  local  administration,  through  the  operations  advisory  committees, 
composed  of  one  representative  from  each  county  within  the  district. 
The  committee,  meeting  monthly  throughout  the  operational  season 
and  sporadically  during  the  remainder  of  the  year,  formulates  basic 
goals  and  policies  for  the  project  in  the  given  district  along  State 
guidelines  and  reviews  all  activities.15 

Annually,  individual  contracts  are  drawn  up  between  the  State 
Weather  Modification  Board  and  the  county  authorities,  written  as 
service  contracts  and  defining  in  detail  the  operations  advisory  com- 
mittee organization,  weather  modification  services  provided,  responsi- 
bilities of  each  party,  and  funding.  For  all  counties  within  an  opera- 
tional district  the  contracts  are  identical  for  all  counties,  except  for 
county  funding  amounts.16 

The  Weather  Modification  Board  is  empowered  to  receive  and  ex- 
pend funds  which  may  become  available  from  Federal  grants  or 
appropriations,  gifts,  bequests,  and  county  funds  received  for  weather 
modification.  With  the  exception  of  funds  received  from  the  counties, 
the  board  may  spend  any  of  these  funds  for  the  encouragement  of 
research  and  development  in  weather  modification  by  private  persons, 
the  North  Dakota  State  University,  the  University  of  North  Dakota, 
or  any  other  appropriate  public  agency  in  the  State,  through  direct 
grant,  contract,  or  other  means.  All  such  funds  are  transferred  to  the 
State  Treasurer  and  placed  in  a  weather  modification  fund.  County 
weather  modification  authorities  which  have  contracted  with  the  State 
board  for  weather  modification  services  contribute  to  the  State 
weather  modification  fund  in  accordance  with  the  determination  of 
the  board  regarding  funding  necessary  to  provide  the  county  with 
weather  modification  services.17 

North  Dakota  operational  projects  in  1975  and  1976 

In  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  North  Dakota  Century 
Code  and  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  Weather  Modification 
Board,  operational  projects  in  the  State  were  sponsored  by  local  or 
regional  weather  modification  associations  through  the  1975  season. 
Since  that  year  all  regional  projects  have  been  conducted  by  the  State 
under  the  North  Dakota  cloud  modification  project,  in  conjunction 
with  weather  modification  associations.  Figures  5  and  6  shows  the 
regions  covered  by  weather  modification  operations  during  the  1975 
and  1976  seasons,  respectively,  in  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  and 
Minnesota.  (The  latter  two  States  are  included  in  the  maps  since  data 
on  their  activities  were  also  part  of  the  report  from  which  North 
Dakota  information  was  obtained.18  The  cross-hatched  circle  in  west- 
ern South  Dakota  in  figure  5  indicates  the  general  location  of  a 
research  project  during  1975. 

15  Rose,  testimony  before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advi- 
sory Board,  August  1977. 
19  Ibid. 

17  North  Dakota  Century  Code.  sees.  2-07-11  and  2-07-11.1. 

18  Schock.  "Weather  Modification  Activities  in  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  and  Minne- 
sota from  1951  Through  1976,"  June  1977,  pp.  62,  64. 


372 


Figure  5. — Counties  in  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  and  Minnesota  in  which 
operational  weather  modification  projects  were  conducted  during  1975.  (The 
cross-hatched  area  indicates  the  approximate  target  area  for  a  research  proj- 
ect.) (From  Schock.  1977.) 


Figure  6.— Counties  in  North  Dakota.  South  Dakota,  and  Minnesota  in  which 
operational  weather  modification  projects  were  conducted  during  1976.  (From 
Schock.  1977.) 


373 


Tables  16  and  IT  provide  information  on  the  projects  in  the  three 
States  for  the  1975  and  1976  seasons,  respectively,  as  shown  in  the 
maps  in  figures  5  and  6.  Reference  numbers  where  footnoted  in  the  first 
column  of  the  tables  correspond  to  North  Dakota  projects.  Other  col- 
umns identify  operators,  sponsors,  operational  periods,  seeding  agents, 
delivery  modes,  whether  or  not  the  project  incorporated  randomized 
seeding,  and  the  objectives.  Xote  that  none  of  the  operational  projects 
included  random  seeding. 

Figure  7  shows  the  number  of  years  from  1951  through  1976  that 
counties  in  the  three-State  area  were  totally  or  partially  included 
in  target  areas  of  weather  modification  projects,  according  to  an  inten- 
sive study  of  projects  in  the  area  over  this  timespan  by  Schock.19 
Statistics  on  these  projects  are  given  in  table  18. 


19  Ibid.,  pp.  15-15. 


374 


co  c 
o  E 


2^ 

c  — 

Ere™ 


1  -o  o  »1 


l  T3     -o  • 


c  00  :E-2 
.  <*>-o  0-  3 


■a  o  ^ 

a.  >-  -o .  -  oo"  =>■  oo 
Q.cuc3j2«j.B-c= 
'=  «J  ro  oj  "  QJ  ="-5 

;I|i-?I:s  i 

t;  co  °  O  co -°  ^  co  o^J-" 

"  iH-s  s  = 5  s  s.es  i 

,±  £  ^g20.i  £  S  J;  O  _ 
m  oo .™  i      nun  oo-Q (_  s  oh 


£■■5 
£  cd  . 

a>  52 

05  "re 
o  CD 


3" 

»-  CO  o 


»     1  £  . 

c  n  ™  «m 

o  o-o^-  | 

^  TO  CO  CO  *-> 

c  g>  fl>  u 

-  C  CO.i;-0 

5  CD  CO  «,  C 
OO.Q 


;  2  I 


ID 

te  (4  percer 

le  (2  percei 
rotechnics. 

«  . 

%~ 

o  _r 

CO 

CO 

1  -5 

l-S 

-rCD 

» 

1! 

Agl 
t 

—  -O 

oo 
< 

1975.. 

1975. 

CO 

CO 

to  Aug. 

to  Aug 

ID 

June 

May 

ikota 
>ocia- 

c 

o 

to 

o 

festern  NortI 
Suppression 

Weather  M< 
ciation,  Inc. 

—  -O 

OO 


r-<  O 


375 


376 


Figure  7. — Counties  in  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  and  Minnesota  which  were 
partially  or  totally  included  in  weather  modification  target  areas  during  the 
years  1951  through  1976.  The  numbers  indicate  the  number  of  seasons  during 
that  time  period  that  a  given  county  included  target  areas  for  weather  modifi- 
cation projects.  (From  Schock,  1977.) 

Table  18. — Statistics  on  operational  and  research  weather  modification  projects 
conducted  in  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  and  Minnesota  during  the  period 
1951  through  1976. 


Number  of  projects   63 

Number  of  seasons  projects  conducted   162 

Number  of  research  projects   14 

Number  of  seasons  research  projects  conducted   27 

Number  of  research  projects  financed  totally  with  Federal  dollars   9 

Number  of  applied  projects  for  which  Federal  dollars  supported  an  evalua- 
tion   2 

Maximum  number  of  counties  in  applied  projects  during  a  single  year 

(1974)    64 

Source  :  Schock,  1977. 


SOUTH  DAKOTA 

In  the  late  1940's  and  early  1950's  there  was  a  proliferation  of 
weather  modification  projects  throughout  the  Great  Plains,  and  as 
much  as  50  percent  of  the  State  of  South  Dakota  is  estimated  to  have 
been  under  cloud  seeding  during  the  peak  years.  Financed  through 
voluntary  contributions  mostly  from  farmers  and  ranchers,  the  tech- 
niques most  often  employed  ground-based  silver  iodide  generators. 
The  first  weather  modification  legislation  in  South  Dakota,  enacted  in 
1953,  established  the  South  Dakota  Weather  Control  Commission  and 
instructed  the  commission  to  promote  and  regulate  cloud-seeding 
activit  ies.-° 


20  Donnan,  John  A..  Jackson  L.  Pellett,  Richard  S.  Leblang,  and  Loo  F.  Hitter,  "The  Rise 
and  Fall  of  the  South  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Program,"  the  Journal  of  Weather 
Modification,  vol.  8,  No.  1,  April  197G,  pp.  1-2. 


377 


There  was  no  Government  support  of  weather  modification  until 
1955,  so  that  all  projects  until  that  year  were  voluntarily  funded.  In 
1955  the  legislature  amended  the  State  law,  authorizing  each  county 
to  levy  up  to  1  mill  on  assessed  valuation  to  support  weather  modifi- 
cation. Counties  took  advantage  of  this  new  authority  and  some  joined 
together  so  that  cooperative  projects  could  be  conducted  in  blocks  of 
contiguous  counties.  In  1959  the  State  Board  of  Regents  established  the 
Institute  of  Atmospheric  Sciences  at  South  Dakota  School  of  Mines 
and  Technology,  and  the  first  Federal  funds  for  weather  modification 
were  made  available  to  the  institute  in  1961.  Through  1970  at  least 
$3,800,000  in  Federal  funds  had  been  invested  in  the  State  to  study 
summertime  cumulus  clouds  and  thunderstorms  and  to  develop 
weather  modification  techniques,  mostly  from  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion, but  also  from  the  Defense  and  Commerce  Departments  and  from 
the  National  Science  Foundation.21 

The  "Weather  Control  Commission  instructed  the  Institute  of  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences  to  develop  an  operational  weather  modification  plan 
for  the  State  in  1969,  and  in  February  1970  individuals  representing 
various  sections  of  the  State's  economy  were  invited  to  review  and 
give  direction  to  such  a  possible  operational  program.  To  coordinate 
development  efforts  the  South  Dakota  Water  Development  Associa- 
tion was  established  from  those  assembled.  In  April  of  that  year  the 
executive  committee  of  the  Legislative  Research  Council  included 
this  program  among  its  studies  of  the  year  and  in  June  and  September 
the  Agriculture  and  Conservation  Committee  of  the  Legislative  Re- 
search Council  heard  testimony  in  support  of  a  statewide  weather 
modification  program.  In  October  the  committee  approved  an  amend- 
ment to  the  existing  weather  modification  law,  directing  the  Weather 
Control  Commission  to  carry  out  a  statewide  program  of  precipitation 
management  and  appropriating  $100,000  in  State  funds  to  develop 
the  program.  The  bill  was  subsequently  approved,  March  17,  1971,  by 
a  two-thirds  majority  of  both  legislative  houses,  as  required  for  all 
special  appropriations  bills.22 

The  Commission  was  attached  to  the  State  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture for  administrative  purposes,  but  was  given  full  authority  to  direct 
the  design  and  development  of  the  program.  In  April  1971  the  com- 
mission selected  a  director,  who  assumed  his  position  in  September  and 
immediately  began  planning  the  statewide  program  for  the  summer  of 
1972.  To  emphasize  and  obtain  local  support,  contact  was  made  with 
and  support  sought  from  agricultural  organizations,  water  groups,  and 
the  South  Dakota  County  Commissioners  Association.  Counties  were 
asked  to  participate  in  the  program,  and  it  was  proposed  that  one 
commissioner  from  each  participating  county  serve  on  a  Weather  Modi- 
fication Advisory  Committee,  each  with  complete  control  over  cloud 
seeding  activities  in  his  county.  The  Weather  Control  Commission 
established  a  cost  share  ratio  of  25  percent  for  the  county  versus  75 
percent  for  the  State.  Of  the  State's  67  counties,  26  agreed  to  partici- 
pate during  the  1972  summer  season  and  entered  into  contract  with 
the  Commission.  As  shown  in  figure  8,  21  of  these  counties  constituted 
a  nearly  solid  block  in  the  southeast  part  of  the  State,  3  were  in  a 
block  in  the  Black  Hills,  and  2  other  large  counties  were  in  the  ex- 

21  Ibid.,  pp.  2-3. 

22  Ibid.,  pp.  3-4. 


378 


treme  northwest  corner  of  the  State,  constituting  a  combined  land  area 
of  17,181,000  acres.23 

In  1972  the  legislature  passed  another  special  appropriation  meas- 
ure, requiring  two-thirds  support  in  both  houses,  which  provided 
$250,000  to  support  the  1972  operational  program  and  administrative 
functions  of  the  Commission  for  fiscal  year  1973.  About  $90,000  was 
received  in  cost-share  .funds  from  participating  counties.  In  view  of 
insufficient  funds,  full-scale  operations  were  conducted  only  in  the 
southeast  part  of  the  State,  and  supplemental  support  was  provided 
elsewhere ;  1972  field  operations,  costing  about  3.2  cents  per  acre,  were 
performed  under  contract  to  the  State  by  private  firms.24 


▲ 


±  Aircraft 


Figure  8. — Twenty-six  counties  in  South  Dakota  which  contracted  with  the 
State  Weather  Control  Commission  in  the  first  year  of  the  statewide  weather 
modification  program  during  the  1972  operating  season.  (From  Donnan,  Pellett, 
Leblang,  and  Ritter,  1976.) 


23  Ibid.,  pp.  4-6. 

24  Ibid.,  pp.  6-8. 


379 


Figure  9. — Forty-six  counties  in  South  Dakota  which  contracted  with  the  State 
Weather  Modification  Commission  and  participated  in  the  statewide  weather 
modification  program  during  the  1974  operating  season.  (From  Donnan,  Pellett, 
Leblang,  and  Hitter,  1976.) 

The  special  State  appropriation  for  1973  approved  by  the  legislature 
was  $643,818,  supplemented  by  $190,141  in  county  funds  and  $7,000 
from  the  Federal  Government.  The  law  was  also  amended  that  year  to 
make  changes  in  the  administrative  structure  and  in  regulations.  The 
Weather  Control  Commission  became  the  Weather  Modification  Com- 
mission with  modified  membership  provisions,  the  Commission  and  all 
of  its  functions  were  transferred  to  the  Department  of  Natural  Ke- 
sources,  and  license  and  permit  requirements  and  violation  penalties 
were  instituted.25  The  1973  summer  operating  season  began  May  1,  with 
42  participating  counties,  divided  into  6  operational  districts.26 

Plans  for  the  1974  season  included  the  intent  for  46  counties  to  par- 
ticipate, constituting  29,547,000  acres.  In  the  fall  of  1973  the  Governor 
considered  the  program  so  well  established  that  he  included  its  f  unding 
in  his  general  appropriations  bill,  requiring  only  a  simple  majority  vote 
for  passage.  The  $803,700  included  was  to  fund  operations  for  July 
and  August  1974  and  May  and  June  1975.  A  special  appropriation  bill 
was  also  introduced  to  provide  $171,000  for  contracted  services  in  May 
and  June  1974.  Both  bills  passed  the  legislature,  and  $243,600  in  county 
moneys  and  $30,200  in  Federal  funds  were  also  available.  The  latter 
funds  were  received  from  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  and  were  to  be 
used  for  evaluation  of  operations.  The  overall  cost  of  the  1974  seeding 
program  was  3.6  cents  per  acre.27  Counties  participating  in  this  peak 
year  for  the  statewide  program  are  shown  on  the  map  in  figure  9. 

25  The  present  South  Dakota  statutes  relating  to  weather  modification  are  reproduced  in 
app.  D,  p.  G04. 

16  Donnan,  et  al.,  "The  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  South  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Pro- 
gram," 1976,  pp.  8-11. 
"Ibid.,  pp.  12-14. 


380 


For  the  1975  summer  seeding  season,  45  counties  expressed  interest  in 
participation.  The  Commission  developed  an  increased  emphasis  on 
public  information  through  over  100  public  meetings  in  the  fall  and 
winter  of  1974-75,  institution  of  a  daily  news  release  program  during 
the  1975  operational  season,  and  expansion  of  the  advisory  committee  to 
include  representatives  from  all  the  counties  in  each  district.  The  fiscal 
year  1976  budget  was  again  included  in  the  general  appropriations  bill. 
Although  evaluations  had  indicated  positive  results  from  the  previous 
seeding,  South  Dakota  was  suffering  from  a  potentially  severe  drought 
and  the  mood  of  the  legislature  was  less  supportive  than  in  earlier 
years.  An  attempt  to  move  the  appropriations  from  the  general  appro- 
priations bill  to  a  special  appropriation  requiring  a  two-thirds  vote 
test  was  defeated,  however,  and  $776,500  was  approved  for  fiscal  year 

1976.  With  county  funds,  the  total  budget  for  that  year  was  $1,076,800, 
and  another  $41,500  from  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation  was  provided  to 
support  evaluations.28 

With  the  approach  of  the  1976  summer  season,  42  counties  provided 
letters  of  intent  to  participate,  and  the  proposed  budget  in  the  Gover- 
nor's fiscal  year  1977  general  appropriations  bill  included  $855,000  for 
the  statewide  weather  modification  program.  It  became  obvious  that  the 
group  opposing  the  State  program  had  become  well  organized  and  in- 
fluential. Concentrating  their  efforts  in  a  few  key  counties  where  the 
commissioners  were  overwhelmed  by  groups  of  strong  opponents,  the 
opposition  was  instrumental  in  changing  the  decisions  to  participate 
by  those  counties.  In  turn,  these  actions  had  negative  effects  on  neigh- 
boring counties.  Consequently  the  42  counties  indicating  intention  to 
participate  in  1976  dwindled  to  22  counties  which  signed  contracts  with 
the  Weather  Modification  Commission.  In  the  legislature,  meanwhile, 
there  was  a  successful  move  to  remove  the  weather  modification  budget 
from  the  Governor's  general  appropriation  bill.  A  special  appropria- 
tion bill  was  promptly  introduced,  along  with  two  other  weather  modi- 
fication bills.  One  would  have  repealed  the  entire,  existing  weather 
modification  law,  and  the  other  would  have  required  a  hearing  by  each 
county  commission  prior  to  issuance  of  a  permit.  None  of  these  bills,  in- 
cluding the  special  appropriation  measure,  passed  the  legislature,  so 
that  no  funds  were  available  to  conduct  the  State  program  in  fiscal  year 

1977.  The  Weather  Modification  Commission  continued  to  function 
as  the  State  regulatory  agency  for  issuance  of  licenses  and  permits.29 

Support  of  operational  weather  modification  projects  in  South  Da- 
kota reverted,  therefore,  to  the  pattern  of  private  and  county  funding 
which  existed  prior  to  establishment  of  the  statewide  program,  and 
the  number  of  such  projects  decreased  dramatically.  With  funds  avail- 
able for  part  of  the  1976  season,  the  State  weather  modification  pro- 
vided some  support  to  local  projects  in  nine  southeastern  counties  and 
to  three  counties  in  the  northwest.  The  latter  joined  with  the  proiect  in 
southwestern  North  Dakota  for  the  1976  season.  The  South  Dakota 
Commission  also  contracted  with  the  State  of  North  Dakota  to  carry 
out  an  evaluation  program  for  1976  operations  in  South  Dakota. 
Another  five-county  area  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State  operated  a 
project  with  no  State  support  during  September  1976,  originating  after 


2*  Ibid.,  pp.  12-14. 
29  Ibid.,  pp.  14-16. 


381 


the  drought  extended  into  that  area.30  Counties  included  in  projects 
carried  out  in  South  Dakota  during  1975  and  1976  are  shown  in  the 
maps  in  figures  5  and  6,  and  information  on  these  projects  is  included 
in  tables  16  and  17,  all  of  which  appear  in  the  section  on  the  discussion 
of  North  Dakota  activities. 

Four  weather  modification  bills  were  introduced  into  the  1977  legis- 
lature, one  of  which  was  a  special  appropriation  bill  which  would  have 
provided  50-percent  State  support  to  operations  in  the  estimated  30 
counties  interested  in  such  a  cooperative  program.  The  special  appro- 
priation failed  as  did  the  other  bills,  and  during  1977  only  Harding 
County,  in  the  northwest,  sponsored  a  seeding  program,  using  county 
funds  and  contracting  with  the  adjacent  project  in  North  Dakota  for 
some  of  the  required  services.  An  attempted  1977  cooperative  project  in 
five  southeastern  counties,  supported  by  private  and  some  county  funds, 
did  not  get  underway.  No  weather  modification  bills  were  presented  in 
the  1978  legislature,  though  minimal  funding  has  been  approved  by  the 
legislature  in  the  past  two  sessions  in  the  general  appropriations  bill 
to  maintain  the  Weather  Modification  Commission.31 

UTAH 

The  State  of  Utah  has  both  one  of  the  largest  State  weather  modifica- 
tion programs  and  one  of  the  more  complete  organizational  structures 
for  administering  State  projects  and  regulations  provided  by  law.  The 
Divison  of  Water  Resources  is  charged  with  developing  the  waters  of 
the  State  to  the  best  beneficial  use  for  citizens  of  Utah,  considered  to 
be  the  second  driest  State  in  the  Nation.32  The  Utah  weather  modifica- 
tion law,  titled  Cloud  Seeding  to  Increase  Precipitation,  was  passed  by 
the  State  legislature  March  5,  1973,  and  became  effective  May  8,  1973. 
In  part,  the  law  states : 

The  State  of  Utah  through  the  Division  of  Water  Resources  shall  be  the  only 
entity,  private  or  public,  that  shall  have  authority  to  authorize,  sponsor,  and/or 
develop  cloud  seeding  research,  evaluation,  or  implementation  projects  to  alter 
precipitation,  cloud  form,  or  meteorological  parameter  within  the  State  of  Utah, 
except  cloud  seeding  for  suppression  of  fog  is  excluded.  The  Division  of  Water 
Resources  shall  authorize,  sponsor,  and/or  develop  local  or  statewide  cloud  seed- 
ing projects  that  conform  to  overall  State  water  planning  objectives  which  are 
determined  to  be  feasible  by  the  Division  of  Water  Resources. ...  A  cloud  seeding 
project  as  used  in  this  act  shall  be  a  planned  project  to  evaluate  meteorological 
conditions,  perform  cloud  seedings,  and  evaluate  results.33 

As  designated  by  this  law,  the  Division  of  Water  Resources  is  the 
State  agency  responsible  for  regulation  and  sponsorship  of  weather 
modification  projects.  A  Board  of  Water  Resources  has  approved  a 
set  of  rules  and  regulations  which  stipulate  requirements  for  licensing 
of  operations  and  obtaining  permits  on  specific  projects.34  These  rules 
are  included  in  appendix  M. 

30  Butler,  Vern  D.,  "Report  of  weather  modification  activities  in  South  Dakota"  (part  of 
report  of  area  No.  5 — North  Central  States).  North  American  Interstate  Weat'  er  Modifica- 
tion Council,  business  meeting,  Dec.  2-3,  1976.  In  NAIWMC  publication  No.  77-1.  Septem- 
ber 1977.  p.  78. 

31  Butler,  Vern  D.,  private  communication. 

32  Summers.  Paul  C.  Utah  cloud  seeding  program,  briefing  before  the  U.S.  Department  of 
Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Sept.  24,  1977. 

33  Utah  Code  Annotated  No.  73-15-3.  Cloud  seeding  to  increase  precipitation — control  of 
division  of  water  resources — powers  and  authority  of  division — "cloud  seeding"  and 
"cloud-seeding  project"  defined.  (The  Utnh  weather  modification  law  is  included  in  its  en- 
tirety along  with  similar  laws  of  other  States  in  app.  D,  p.  612.) 

34  State  of  Utah,  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  Division  of  Water  Resources,  "Rules, 
Regulations,  and  Procedures  Relating  to  the  Utah  Cloud  Seeding  Act  of  1973"  (Laws  of 
Utah,  ch.  193),  March  1976,  13  pp. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  27 


382 


The  State's  cloud  seeding  program  is  administered  by  a  small  stall' 
in  the  -Division  of  Water  Resources,  augmented  by  two  advisory 
groups  of  experts.  The  Program  Advisory  Committee  (PAC)  includes 
representatives  from  State,  Federal,  and  local  agencies,  such  as  the 
Forest  Service,  the  National  Park  Service,  State  Lands,  and  local  user 
groups  who  have  either  a  direct  or  indirect  interest  in  the  program. 
The  Technical  Advisory  Group  (TAG)  is  composed  of  meteorologists 
from  the  National  Weather  Service,  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  tho 
University  of  Utah,  and  Utah  State  University  as  well  as  statisticians 
from  the  Soil  Conservation  Service  and  the  University  of  Utah.35 

The  operational  cloud-seeding  program  in  Utah  is  organized  on  a 
State-county  basis,  where  costs  are  shared  between  the  State  and  the 
counties  or  other  political  subdivisions.  The  cost  sharing  ratio  is  ap- 
proximately 60  percent  State  to  40  percent  local.  From  1973  through 
1975,  before  State  funds  were  available,  a  group  of  counties  in  the 
southern  part  of  the  State,  an  area  of  somewhat  constant  drought, 
contracted  for  seeding  winter  clouds  to  increase  mountain  snowpack. 
In  1975  the  legislature  appropriated  State  funds,  however,  which  per- 
mitted expansion  of  seeding  operations  to  1-1  southern  counties,  cover- 
ing about  60  percent  of  the  land  area  of  the  State.  That  same  year 
three  northern  counties  joined  three  southern  counties  in  Idaho,  ini- 
tiating a  project  for  rain  enhancement  and  hail  suppression  that  has 
been  conducted  during  the  summers  of  1976  and  1977.  The  severe 
drought  conditions  of  the  past  year  led  to  increased  interest  from  local 
officials  and  increased  funding  from  the  State  legislature,  so  that 
projects  were  conducted  in  all  but  three  of  the  State's  29  counties 
during  197T.36 

The  Utah  program  also  supports  weather  modification  research. 
State  funds  have  been  earmarked  for  research  activities  as  well  as  for 
evaluation  and  environmental  monitoring.  In  particular,  weather  mod- 
ification research  at  the  Utah  Water  Research  Laboratory,  formerly 
supported  by  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  is  now  funded  by  the  State, 
since  Federal  "Sky water"  funds  have  not  been  available  in  recent  years. 
The  State  has  officially  agreed  to  support  the  proposed  plan  of  the 
Bureau  of  Reclamation  to  augment  water  supplies  in  the  Colorado 
River  through  cloud  seeding  in  the  major  watersheds  in  the  river 
basin.  The  Division  of  Water  Resources  recently  concluded  an  agree- 
ment with  the  Bureau  to  begin  preliminary  project  design  in  the  Uinta 
Mountains  of  eastern  Utah  in  preparation  for  this  project.37 

WASHINGTON 

Under  the  weather  modification  law  of  the  State  of  Washington 38 
the  Department  of  Ecology  is  charged  with  responsibility  for  super- 
vision and  control  of  all  weather  modification  activities  conducted 
within  the  State.  The  department  also  represents  the  State  in  all  inter- 
state contacts  relating  to  weather  modification.  In  accordance  with 
regulations  promulgated  by  the  State  to  implement  the  administra- 
tion of  the  law,  the  Department  of  Ecology  carries  out  the  State's 
program  of  regulation  which  requires  the  issuing  of  licenses  and  per- 
mits, the  payment  of  fees,  and  the  reporting  of  activities.  These  regu- 
lations, reproduced  in  appendix  M,  apply  to  all  weather  modification 

•«  Summers,  "Utah  Cloud  Seeding  Program,"  1977. 

38  Ibid. 

37  Ibid. 

28  RCW  43.37.010  through  910.  See  app.  D  for  the  text  of  the  Washington  law,  p.  613. 


383 


activities  in  all  parts  of  the  State  except  as  specifically  exempted.39 
Activities  which  are  exempted  from  licensing,  permit,  and  liability 
requirements  include  the  following: 

1.  All  research  and  experiments  related  to  weather  modfication 
and  control  conducted  within  laboratories; 

2.  Those  weather  modification  operations  designed  to  alleviate 
sudden,  unexpected,  hazardous  conditions  which  require  expe- 
ditious localized  action  for: 

a.  Protection  against  fire, 

b.  Prevention  of  frost, 

c.  Dispersal  of  fog ;  and 

3.  Field  research  and  development  by  institutions  of  higher 
learning.40 

Persons  intending  to  conduct  activities  under  the  second  exemption 
above  are  required  to  make  "every  reasonable  effort"  prior  to  the 
operations  to  notify  the  Department  of  Ecology  of  the  proposed  action 
and  to  provide  certain  information  on  operations  to  be  conducted. 
Persons  planning  to  conduct  field  research  under  the  third  exemption 
above  must  provide  information  on  their  proposed  project  in  writing 
to  the  department  10  days  prior  to  commencement  of  activities  and 
must  report  periodically  on  the  status  of  the  project.41 

Licensing  is  required  for  each  individual  or  organization  planning 
to  conduct  nonexempted  operations,  and  qualifications  for  such  a  li- 
cense include  the  requirement  for  responsible  individuals  to  be  certified 
professional  members  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  or  to 
possess  academic  achievements  and  professional  experience  necessary 
to  receive  such  certification.  Permits  are  required  for  each  operation 
not  exempted,  and  applicants  for  such  permits  must  publish  notice  of 
intention  to  conduct  weather  modification  operations  in  a  legal  news- 
paper having  general  circulation  in  the  county  or  counties  in  which 
the  affected  area  is  located.  The  permittee  is  required  to  maintain  daily 
reports  on  operations  and  to  submit  bimonthly  reports  to  the  Depart- 
ment of  Ecology.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  must  also  be  pro- 
vided to  the  department.42 

Normally  the  State  of  Washington  does  not  finance  weather  mod- 
ification operations;  however,  the  severe  drought  conditions  in  late 
1976  led  the  State  legislature,  upon  the  recommendation  of  the  Senate 
Committee  on  Agriculture,  to  pass  an  emergency  cloud-seeding  bill 
on  February  18,  1977.  This  act  authorized  the  Department  of  Natural 
Resources  to  enter  into  a  contract  with  the  University  of  Washington's 
Cloud  Physics  Group  to  conduct  emergency  cloud  seeding.43  The  con- 
tract required  the  university  to  carry  out  a  program  of  weather  modi- 
fication, using  aircraft,  in  an  attempt  to  increase  snowpack  in  the  Cas- 
cade Mountains  and  to  augment  precipitation  in  critical  areas  of  east- 
ern Washington,  although  highest  priority  and  maximum  effort  were 
given  to  the  Cascade  Mountain  work  following  subsequent  direction 
from  the  Department  of  Natural  Resources.44 

All  of  the  seeding  in  this  program  was  done  from  aircraft  in  order 

39  Ch.  173-495  WAC.  weather  modification,  adopted  Dec.  28,  1977. 
«  Ibid.,  WAC  173-495-040. 
«  Ibid. 
J2  Ibid. 

43  Additional  weather  modification  projects  were  carried  out  by  public  utility  companies 
and  private  organizations  under  the  general  authorization  of  this  act ;  two  of  these  projects 
are  discussed  briefly  below. 

"  Hobbs,  Peter  V.,  "The  State  of  Washington's  Emergency  Cloud  Seeding  Program  (Feb- 
ruary-June 1977)."  University  of  Washington,  Department  of  Atmospheric  Sciences,  Cloud 
Physics  Group,  Seattle,  July  1977,  pp.  1-3. 


384 


to  eliminate  uncertainties  from  ground-based  seeding.  Crushed  dry  ice 
was  dispensed  over  the  Cascades,  but  the  warm  clouds  in  eastern  Wash- 
ington were  to  be  seeded  with  ammonium  nitrate  had  that  portion  of 
the  program  not  been  curtailed.  Since  the  State's  emergency  cloud 
seeding  program  was  an  operational  program  and  not  experimental, 
it  was  not  designed  nor  operated  in  a  way  that  could  provide  a  sci- 
entific evaluation  of  the  seeding  effects.  A  scientist  aboard  each  flight 
assessed  the  potential  for  seeding  and  decided  upon  the  optimum  flight 
route  and  rate  of  dispersal  for  seeding  material.  Wherever  possible, 
effects  of  seeding  were  documented  through  visual  observation,  pho- 
tography, or  direct  measurements.  It  was  apparent,  in  spite  of  the 
limitations  imposed  on  evaluation,  that  "significant  modifications  to 
cloud  structures  and  increases  in  precipitation-sized  particles  were 
produced  by  the  cloud  seeding.  It  is  likely  that  these  modifications  pro- 
duced increases  in  precipitation  on  the  ground,  although  this  cannot 
be  proved  scientifically  from  the  data  collected  in  this  operational 
program."  45 

Hobbs  has  proposed  that  a  demonstration  cloud-seeding  project  for 
the  State  of  Washington  be  designed  and  implemented,  using  both 
physical  and  statistical  criteria  to  determine  the  effects  of  seeding. 
Such  a  project  is  currently  under  consideration  by  the  Washington 
State  Depart ment  of  Commerce  and  Economic  Development  and 
would  be  conducted  by  the  University  of  Washington.46 

Two  other  projects  conducted  during  the  1977  drought  by  a  commer- 
cial operator  under  contract  may  be  noted.  In  one  case  farmers  in  Gar- 
field and  Columbia  Counties  in  eastern  Washington  formed  a  local 
association,  collected  a  10-cent  per  acre  assessment,  and  deposited  the 
funds  with  the  State  Department  of  Natural  Kesources,  who  con- 
tracted on  their  behalf  for  the  requested  services.  Non-randomized 
weather  modification  operations  were  conducted  in  May  and  June  of 
1977,  using  a  cloud-seeding  aircraft  and  a  weather  radar  system  in- 
stalled at  Pomeroy,  Washington.  Based  on  preliminary  analysis  of 
precipitation  data  from  National  Weather  Service  stations  and  from 
other  local  stations  in  the  target  and  control  areas,  a  15  to  20  percent 
increase  in  rainfall  from  seeded  storms  was  suggested.47 

The  other  operational  program,  conducted  by  the  same  contractor, 
was  initiated  by  the  Tacoma  City  Light  and  Power  Company,  as  a 
possible  means  of  enhancing  water  supplies  from  the  Cowlitz  and  Nis- 
qually  watersheds  in  southwestern  Washington.  Funding  was  passed 
from  the  company  to  the  State  Department  of  Natural  Resources, 
which  contracted  for  the  seeding  in  March  1977,  and  operations  were 
carried  out  from  late  March  through  June,  using  an  aircraft  and  a 
weather  radar  system  for  support,  Preliminary  analysis,  based  on  com- 
parisons of  precipitation  data  from  the  control  and  target  areas,  again 
suggested  rainfall  increases  of  15  to  20  percent  from  the  seeded 
storms.48 

45  Ibid.,  p.  5.  9.  and  23. 
"Ibid.,  pp.  26-27. 

47  Henderson,  Thomas  J.,  "The  Eastern  Washington  Cloud  Seeding  Program,  a  summary 
of  cloud  seeding  activities  conducted  over  portions  of  Garfield  and  Columbia  Counties  in 
Washington  during  the  period  May  18,  1077  through  June  30,  1077."  Atmospherics,  Inc., 
report  prepared  for  the  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  State  of  Washington,  Fresno, 
Calif   July  20.  1077.  pp.  2.  3,  and  21. 

48  Henderson,  Thomas  J.,  "The  Cowlitz-Nisqually  Cloud  Seeding  Program,  a  summary 
of  cloud  seeding  activities  conducted  over  the  Cowlitz-Nisqually  Drainage  In  Washington 
during  the  period  March  25,  1077  through  June  30,  1077."  Atmospherics,  Inc.,  report  pre- 
pared for  the  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  State  of  Washington,  Fresno,  California, 
July  26,  1077,  pp.  2  and  17. 


CHAPTER  8 


PRIVATE  ACTIVITIES  IN  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

Two  previous  chapters  reviewed,  respectively,  the  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  and  interests  of  the  Federal  Government  and  of  State 
and  local  jurisdictions.  Many  of  the  operational  services  performed 
for  agencies  in  these  governmental  bodies  and  for  private  sponsors, 
have  been  carried  out  under  contract  by  commercial  firms  who  have 
developed  expertise  in  a  broad  range  of  weather  modification  capa- 
bilities or  who  specialize  in  particular  services  essential  to  both  re- 
search and  operational  projects.  A  summary  of  the  kinds  of  activities 
performed  by  these  companies  is  contained  in  this  chapter.  Other  pri- 
vate organizations — such  as  cooperative  associations  of  farmers  and 
orchardists,  utilities,  airlines,  and  lumber  companies — are  among 
the  sponsors  and  organizers  of  operational  weather  modification  proj- 
ects. Some  of  these  privately  sponsored  projects  have  been  discussed 
in  several  sections  of  the  previous  chapter  under  activities  conducted 
within  and  under  the  regulation  of  the  States. 

While  the  majority  of  universities  whose  atmospheric  science  and 
other  departments  have  participated  significantly  in  weather  modifi- 
cation research  projects  are  public  institutions,  mostly  in  the  Western 
States,  a  few  private  universities  and  research  foundations  have  also 
contributed  to  the  understanding  of  weather  modification  through 
their  research  activities.  Since  the  efforts  of  universities  are  so  closely 
tied  to  the  discussions  on  the  status  of  the  technology  and  needed  re- 
search, Federal  and  State  activities,  and  other  particular  aspects  of  the 
subject  addressed  in  later  chapters,  activities  of  academic  institutions 
are  not  discussed  separately. 

Important  among  the  private  institutions  concerned  with  weather 
modification  are  the  professional  organizations  of  which  research  and 
operational  weather  modifiers  and  other  interested  meteorologists  are 
members.  These  include  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  the 
Weather  Modification  Association,  and  the  Irrigation  and  Drainage 
Division  of  the  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers.  In  addition,  the 
North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council  (discussed 
in  the  previous  chapter)  is  an  organization  whose  membership  consists 
of  governments  of  U.S.  States  and  Canadian  Provinces  and  the  gov- 
ernment of  Mexico,  which  serves  as  a  forum  for  interstate  coordi- 
nation and  exchange  of  information  on  weather  modification.  Two  pro- 
fessional organizations,  the  Weather  Modification  Association  and  the 
American  Meteorological  Society,  will  be  discussed  in  this  chapter. 

(385) 


386 


Weather  modification  is  controversial,  and  both  formal  and  in- 
formal opposition  groups  have  developed  in  various  sections  of  the 
country.  Reasons  for  such  opposition  are  varied  and  are  based  on  both 
real  and  perceived  adverse  consequences  from  weather  modification. 
Some  of  the  objections  often  voiced  by  private  groups  and  some  ex- 
amples of  formal  opposition  groups  are  reviewed  in  this  chapter. 

Commercial  Weather  Modifiers 

scope  and  significance  of  contract  activities 

Weather  modification  operations,  which  now  cover  a  significant  area 
of  the  United  States,  are  almost  exclusively  conducted  on  a  contract 
basis  for  specific  users  by  professional  cloud  seeding  organizations. 
Contracts  often  cover  only  one  season  of  the  year;  however,  a  large 
number  of  such  projects  are  renewed  annually.  Target  areas  range 
from  a  few  hundred  to  a  few  thousand  square  miles.  In  1976,  6  of  10 
major  companies  having  substantial  numbers  of  contracts  received 
about  $2.7  million  in  contract  awards  for  operations  within  the  United 
States.  In  addition,  a  few  of  these  companies  also  had  overseas  con- 
tracts.1 Owing  to  the  increased  demand  for  emergency  programs  dur- 
ing the  recent  drought,  it  is  estimated  that  1977  contracts  totaled  about 
$3.5  million.  Most  weather  modification  operational  activities  are 
carried  out  in  the  region  of  the  country  from  the  Great  Plains  west- 
ward, though  some  projects  do  occur  from  time  to  time  in  Eastern 
States  as  well.  The  distribution  of  these  projects  is  shown  in  figure  2 
in  the  previous  chapter;  and  statistics  on  commercial  operators  and 
projects  in  which  they  provide  services  are  contained  in  tables  in  that 
chapter.2 

The  initial  role  of  the  private  weather  modification  operators  was 
to  sustain  weather  modification  activity  during  its  early  years.  During 
that  period  there  was  heated  scientific  controversy  with  other  pro- 
fessional meteorologists  on  the  efficacy  of  cloud  seeding.  Later,  their 
operations  provided  a  valuable  data  base  which  permitted  the  early 
evaluation  of  seeding  efforts  and  estimation  of  the  potential  prospects 
for  the  technology,  especially  by  several  select  committees  assembled 
for  such  assessment  within  the  Federal  Government.3  Meanwhile, 
commercial  operators,  who  decreased  in  number  after  the  initial  surge 
of  the  early  1950  era,  have  grown  in  competence  and  in  public  respect. 
Their  operations  have  incorporated  the  benefits  of  accumulated  experi- 
ence and  research  findings.  Today,  more  often  that  not,  they  work 
hand  in  hand  with  researchers  in  weather  modification,  and,  in  fact, 
they  often  participate  in  research  projects,  contributing  much  of  their 
know-how  acquired  through  their  unique  experiences. 

SUMMARY  OF  CONTRACT  SERVICES 

The  first  scientific  weather  modification  activities  were  conducted  by 
the  private  sector.  In  an  earlier  chapter  Ave  noted  the  now  famous 
pioneering  work  of  Schaefer,  Langmuir,  and  Vonnegut — all  with  the 
General  Electric  Co. — in  the  mid-  to  late  1940's.4  After  the  early 

1  Elliott  Robert  D.,  private  communication,  I >ecember  1977. 

2  See  ch.  7,  pp.  345  and  347. 

Elliott,  private  communication,  l!>77. 
*  See  ch.  2,  p.  37. 


387 


General  Electric  discoveries,  the  first  early  cloud  seeding  was  initiated 
by  crop  dusters,  operating  on  their  own  behalf  or  in  service  to  farm 
groups.5  In  addition  to  providing  some  extra  water  and  accumulating 
information  on  seeding  effects,  these  private  projects  provided  testing 
for  various  seeding  modes  and  for  different  operational  schemes.6 

Since  the  early  1950's  cloud-seeding  activities  have  been  carried  on 
at  a  moderately  uniform  level  following  the  initial  flurry  of  activities 
immediately  after  the  General  Electric  discoveries.  Excluding  fog 
clearing  (which  is  customarily  not  performed  in  the  context  of  weather 
modification  but  rather  as  part  of  other  airport  operations),  the  an- 
nual number  of  private  weather  modification  projects  has  been  about 
30,  mostly  concentrating  in  rain  or  snowpack  enhancement.7  The  num- 
ber of  such  projects  and  the  number  of  operators  were  47  and  15, 
respectively,  during  calendar  year  1975,  according  to  the  records  of 
the  Xational  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA).8 
(The  NO  A  A  statistics  include  operations  in  fog  dispersal  at  airports.) 
Many  of  the  operations  discussed  earlier  and  summarized  in  tables  and 
figures  on  U.S.  weather  modification  activities  for  1975  and  1976  in- 
clude operations  that  have  either  been  conducted  or  sponsored  by  pri- 
vate concerns.9 

During  the  1950's  and  1960's  these  projects  were  conducted  for  the 
most  part  by  five  major  companies  though  a  larger  number  were  in- 
volved during  the  early  1950's.  Developing  in  the  1960's  and  moving 
into  the  1970's  a  number  of  operators,  inclined  to  depend  mostly  on 
aircraft  seeding,  began  summer  cumulus  seeding  in  the  northern  Great 
Plains.  Their  emphasis  has  been  primarily  on  increasing  rainfall  and 
suppressing  hail,  and  their  principal  sponsors  have  been  farm  groups.10 

Since  the  1950's  there  have  been  conducted,  on  an  annual  basis,  be- 
tween six  and  nine  operational  projects  intended  to  increase  precipita- 
tion in  watersheds  in  the  West,  sponsored  by  utility  companies.  A  num- 
ber of  these  projects  were  continued  over  an  extended  period  of  years. 
The  Southern  California  Edison  project,  for  example,  in  the  upper 
San  Joaquin  River  basin  in  the  Sierra  Xevada  Mountains  has  been  in 
operation  continuously  every  winter  since  the  1950-51  season.11  Such 
utility  company  projects  tend  to  run  for  a  number  of  successive  years 
when  demand  exceeds  power  resources;  after  new  generating  plants 
with  full  reservoirs  become  operational,  cloud  seeding  is  often  cur- 
tailed until  again  required  by  increased  power  demands. 

There  has  also  been  some  interest  in  cloud  seeding  on  the  part  of 
the  Western  lumber  industry,  when  drought  conditions  reduce  fuel 
moisture  indices  and  increase  the  attendant  potential  for  forest  fires. 
Enhancement  of  precipitation  from  summer  cumulus  clouds,  through 
contracts  with  weather  modification  operators,  has  been  employed  to 
increase  moisture  and,  on  occasions,  to  assist  in  limiting  or  extinguish- 
ing fires.12 

5  Elliott,  Robert  D..  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  in  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (editor), 
'Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  p.  46. 

6  Ibid. 
'  IMd. 

8  Charak.  Mason  T.,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  :  Calendar  Year  1975,"  Na- 
tional Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and 
Prediction.  Rockvillp.  Md..  June  1976,  p.  4. 

9  See  ch.  7,  p.  343  ff,  and  see  app.  G. 

10  Elliott.  1974,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector."  1974,  pp.  47-48. 

11  Ibid.,  p.  48. 

12  Ibid. 


388 


Under  the  guidance  of  the  airlines,  the  use  of  weather  modification 
to  clear  airport  fog  was  initiated  as  an  operational  procedure  during 
the  19'60's.  Since  the  current  operational  procedures  apply  almost 
exclusively  to  cold  fogs,  airports  in  more  northerly  or  higher  altitude 
locations  in  the  United  States  are  the  ones  which  can  benefit  from  this 
technology.  Each  winter,  there  are  about  15  projects  underway 
throughout  the  country.  The  seeding  flights  are  usually  conducted  by 
local  operators  under  contract  to  the  airlines.  Low-flying  aircraft 
usually  seed  with  crushed  dry  ice,  which  is  dropped  into  the  fog.13  In 
1975  there  were  nine  cold  fog  and  one  warm  fog  dispersal  projects 
conducted  at  U.S.  airports  under  contract  to  airlines.14 

The  principal  U.S.  commercial  weather  modification  operators  are 
also  involved  in  contract  services  in  other  parts  of  the  world.  In  par- 
ticular, such  projects  have  been  conducted  in  Canada,  in  Central  and 
South  America,  in  Africa,  in  the  Near  East,  and  in  Europe.15 

EVALUATION  AND  RESEARCH  BY  COMMERCIAL  FIRMS 

Commercial  weather  modification  firms,  under  contract  to  private 
organizations  or  local  jurisdictions,  are  expected  to  develop  additional 
water  resources  or  to  modify  effects  of  damaging  storms  in  order  to 
alleviate  immediate  or  impending  economic  and  personal  losses 
brought  on  by  drought  or  other  severe  weather.  They  are  therefore 
usually  obliged  to  expend  most  if  not  all  of  their  efforts  and  support- 
ing funds  in  attempting  to  mitigate  these  extreme  conditions  and  to 
attend  less  to  scientific  evaluation  of  their  activities  than  would  be  true 
in  a  carefully  designed  experimental  or  demonstration  project. 

The  private  sector  has  contributed  to  evaluation,  however.  It  has 
pioneered  in  evaluation  of  results  through  comparison  of  data  from 
seeding  operations  with  historical  data,  using  the  latter  as  the  un- 
seeded samples.  Using  relationships  based  on  historical  precipitation 
records,  for  example,  predictions  have  been  made  of  what  precipitation 
can  be  expected  in  the  target  area  when  seeded.  There  is,  of  course,  the 
possibility  that  historical  data  contain  inconsistencies,  so  that,  in  a 
project  performed  purely  for  research  purposes,  this  practice  is  re- 
placed by  randomization.  This  kind  of  evaluation  has  also  been  applied 
in  projects  designed  to  increase  snowpack,  where  snow  course  measure- 
ments, taken  at  monthly  intervals  in  the  West  for  the  past  20  to  40 
years,  have  provided  the  historical  record.10  Statistics  on  annual 
stream  flow  and  on  crop  hail  damage  have  also  been  used  as  criteria 
for  project  evaluation. 

The  private  sector  of  the  weather  modification  community  has  also 
been  involved  in  the  conduct  of  projects  designed  for  pure  research 
purposes,  when  under  contract  to  provide  a  variety  of  professional 
services  in  connection  with  projects.  A  series  of  such  experiments  have 
been  carried  out,  for  example,  in  the  vicinity  of  Santa  Barbara,  Calif. 
The  first  Santa  Barbara  randomized  seeding  project  (1957-60)  in- 
volved one  major  private  contractor.  North  American  Weather  Con- 
sultants, along  with  a  number  of  State  and  local  agencies  from  Cali- 
fornia and  some  agencies  of  the  Federal  Government.  The  second 

«  It.ld..  pp.  4S-49. 

m  Xo<>  tallies  6  and  7.  ch.  7,  and  also  see  app.  G. 

«  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector."  1974.  p.  49. 

10  Ibid.,  p.  60. 


389 


Santa  Barbara  randomized  seeding  experiment  (1967-70)  was  con- 
ducted by  North  American  Weather  Consultants  under  contract  to 
the  Naval  Weapons  Center  at  China  Lake,  Calif.  Also,  during  the 
1970?s,  a  randomized  seeding  project  was  sponsored  by  the  Pacific  Gas 
&  Electric  Co.  in  the  Lake  Almanor  drainage  basin  of  the  Sierra 
Nevada.17  There  are  other  examples  where  users  have  conducted  ran- 
domized projects  for  a  number  of  years  in  order  to  "calibrate''  their 
watersheds  and  cloud  types. 

PARTICIPATION  IN  FEDERAL  RESEARCH  PROJECTS 

A  number  of  private  firms  have  performed  a  variety  of  meteorologi- 
cal services  under  contract  to  Federal  agencies  sponsoring  weather 
modification  research  projects.  These  companies  include  both  those 
who  also  provide  professional  weather  modification  services  in  pri- 
vately or  publicly  financed  operational  projects  as  well  as  meteorologi- 
cal firms  who  do  not  otherwise  engage  in  weather  modification.  Al- 
though most  weather  modification  programs  of  the  several  Federal 
agencies  have  at  some  time  contracted  with  such  private  companies 
as  well  as  with  universities,  the  principal  sponsor  of  research  projects 
using  these  contractors  in  recent  years  has  been  the  Bureau  of  Reclama- 
tion through  its  atmospheric  water  resources  management  program 
(Project  Skywater).  Some  of  these  commercial  organizations,  who 
have  performed  various  services  for  "Skywater"  are  identified  in 
table  8  in  chapter  5.18  Prior  to  reduction  of  weather  modification  re- 
search activities  in  the  1970's,  the  Department  of  Defense  was  a  major 
sponsor  of  contracted  research  with  industrial  and  academic  weather 
modification  groups. 

While  a  contracting  firm  is  customarily  responsible  for  most  aspects 
of  an  operational  project  if  funded  privately  or  by  State  or  local  tax 
assessments,  its  participation  in  a  Federal  research  project  is  more 
often  limited  to  one  or  a  few  specialized  services  which  it  can  provide 
especially  well,  based  on  its  unique  experience.  Such  services  are  usual- 
ly of  the  operations  type  and  include  aircraft  support,  seeding,  equip- 
ment maintenance,  data  gathering,  or  other  field  services.  Some  high- 
ly specialized  companies  assist  with  project  design,  meteorological 
measurements,  data  analysis,  and  report  preparation.  The  overall 
project  planning  and  design,  project  monitoring,  integration  of  par- 
ticipant responsibilities,  and  final  evaluation  are  usually  managed  by 
the  responsible  field  personnel  of  the  Federal  agency  itself,  while  spe- 
cialized analyses,  evaluations,  and  related  studies  are  most  often  per- 
formed by  scientists  and  other  experts  associated  with  participating 
universities  or  research  organizations. 

Weather  Modification  Organizations 

professional  organizations 

There  are  three  professional  organizations  in  the  United  States  to 
one  or  more  of  which  most  weather  modifiers  and  others  interested  in 
weather  modification  belong  and  through  which  scientific,  technical, 
and  legal  problems  and  findings  are  aired  and  discusssed.  In  addition. 


17  Ibid.,  p.  68. 
1S  See  p.  250. 


390 


v  arious  other  matters  are  addressed  by  these  groups,  including  state- 
ments on  weather  modification  policy,  opinions  on  pending  legisla- 
tion, social  implications,  and  professional  standards  and  certification. 
These  organizations  are  the  Weather  Modification  Association,  the 
American  Meteorological  Society,  and  the  American  Society  of  Civil 
Engineers.  The  first  of  these  three  is  concerned  exclusively  with 
weather  modification,  while  the  latter  two  represent  professional  in- 
terests and  activities  across  a  wide  range  of  meteorological  and  en- 
gineering fields,  respectively;  however,  each  of  the  larger  societies  has 
a  committee  concerned  particularly  with  weather  modification.  Two 
of  these  professional  organizations  are  discussed  below. 

Weather  Modification  Association 

Recently  the  following  four  stated  purposes  of  the  Weather  Modi- 
fication Association  (WMA)  were  given  in  testimony : 19 

1.  Promotion  of  research,  development,  and  understanding  of 
weather  modification  for  beneficial  uses ; 

2.  Encouraging  and  promoting  the  highest  standards  of  con- 
duct, including  certification  of  individual  members  qualified  to 
execute  field  experiments  and  operations  in  weather  modification ; 

3.  Serving  as  a  clearinghouse  and  dissemination  agent  for 
weather  modification  oriented  literature  and  information ;  and 

4.  Assuming  an  active  role  and  maintaining  a  strong  voice  in 
the  production  and  dissemination  of  policy  statements  concerning 
all  aspects  of  weather  modification  practice. 

The  WMA  was  conceived  in  April  1951  at  a  meeting  of  weather 
modifiers  and  their  clients  in  Riverside,  Calif.,  called  to  discuss  pos- 
sible methods  of  organizing  and  controlling  weather  modification 
operations  and  evaluations  in  California  in  order  to  raise  the  stand- 
ards of  those  engaged  in  cloud  seeding  operations.  At  that  meeting  an 
organization,  tentatively  called  "The  Artificial  Precipitation  Opera- 
tions Association,"  was  formed;  a  second  was  held  later  the  same 
month  and  the  name  was  changed  to  the  "Weather  Control  Research 
Association."  In  the  following  years  the  organization  developed,  its 
activities  increased,  and  its  membership  grew  and  became  more  repre- 
sentative of  other  parts  of  the  country.  Its  current  name  was  adopted 
in  March  1967.20 

Current  membership  in  the  WMA  is  approximately  250,  including 
both  individuals  and  corporations  interested  in  the  field  of  weather 
modification.  Members  are  mostly  from  the  United  States ;  however, 
there  are  members  from  some  foreign  countries  as  well.  The  diverse 
interests  and  backgrounds  of  the  members  range  from  concerned  water 
users  to  university  professors.21 

The  WMA  conducts  semiannual  business  and  technical  meetings, 
usually  in  the  West  or  the  Midwest,  where  weather  modification  proj- 
ects are  more  common  and  where  the  membership  is  more  heavily 
represented.  The  1977  meetings  were  held  in  April  in  Salt  Lake  City 
and  in  October  in  Champaign,  111.  The  latter  meeting  was  conducted 
jointly  with  the  Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent 

19  Griffith,  Don  A..  Thomas  J.  Henderson.  Theodore  B.  Smith,  and  Arnett  S.  Dennis,  testi- 
mony hefore  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Cham- 
paign 111..  Oct.  13.  1977. 

20  "Background  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association,"  the  Journal  of  Weather  Modi- 
fication, vol.  9,  No.  1.  April  1977,  p.  207. 

-l  Griffith,  et  al.,  testimony  hefore  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977. 


391 


Weather  Modification  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  of 
which  the  WMA  was  one  of  two  cosponsors.  The  1978  spring  meeting 
of  the  WMA  is  to  be  held  in  Tucson,  Ariz. 

Beginning  in  1969,  the  WMA  has  published  the  Journal  of  Weather 
Modification.  While  it  has  been  the  practice  of  the  association  to  pro- 
duce a  single  annual  issue  of  the  journal  in  most  years,  usually  in 
April,  two  issues  were  published  in  1975  and  1976.22  Another  recent 
publication  of  the  WMA  is  a  brochure,  which  presents  the  basic  con- 
cepts of  weather  modification,  discusses  the  involvement  of  various 
levels  of  government,  and  relates  some  facts  on  the  WMA  itself.23 

Since  1968  the  WMA  has  officially  supported  the  concept  of  develop- 
ing a  model  law  for  regulation  of  weather  modification  activities  at 
the  State  and/or  Federal  level.  A  main  feature  of  such  a  law  would  be 
the  establishment  of  a  weather  modification  board,  whose  membership 
would  be  selected  mainly  from  the  private  sector,  representing  inter- 
ests concerned  with  water  resources  as  they  affect  agriculture  and  in- 
dustry. The  envisioned  board  would  perform  various  functions  such  as 
licensing,  review,  and  recordkeeping.  The  WMA  also  supported  the 
formation  of  the  Advisory  Board  on  Weather  Modification  by  the 
Secretary  of  Commerce  to  conduct  the  study  and  prepare  the  report 
required  by  the  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976.24 

One  of  the  purposes  of  the  WMA  is  to  certify  individual  members 
who  are  deemed  to  be  qualified  to  direct  weather  modification  opera- 
tions and/or  experiments.  Certification  is  granted  only  upon  the 
unanimously  favorable  vote  by  a  certification  board,  which  examines 
each  applicant  in  the  areas  of  knowledge,  experience,  and  character. 
The  WMA  considers  certification  to  be  desirable  in  order  to  "*  *  * 
accomplish  other  purposes  of  the  association,  namely,  promoting  re- 
search and  engineering  advancement,  encouraging  and  promoting  the 
highest  standards  for  professional  conduct,  and  assisting  in  arrang- 
ing liability  insurance  upon  application  from  members  performing 
operations  or  experiments."  25  As  of  April  1977  the  WMA  had  cer- 
tified 35  of  its  "members,  the  majority  of  whom  are  officers  and/or 
meteorologists  with  weather  modification  contractors ;  however,  others 
are  associated  with  universities  or  wTith  various  public  and  private 
organizations.  Two  of  the  certified  members  are  Mexican,  and  the  re- 
mainder are  from  the  United  States.26 

The  WMA  has  been  considering  the  adoption  of  a  statement  on 
standards  and  ethics  for  weather  modification  operators.  A  draft 
statement,  prepared  by  the  WMA  committee  on  standards  and  ethics, 
was  presented  to  the  members  at  the  1977  fall  meeting  for  review  and 
comment  and  will  be  considered  for  its  adoption  or  further  modifica- 
tion at  the  1978  spring  meeting.  Copies  of  the  WMA  proposed  draft 
statement  on  standards  and  ethics  for  weather  modification  operators, 
the  WMA  constitution  and  bylaws,  and  the  qualifications  and  proce- 
dures for  certification  by  the  WMA  are  all  contained  in  appendix  N. 

22  The  latest  available  issue  of  The  Journal  of  Weather  Modification  is  vol.  10,  No.  1, 
April  1978.  All  previous  issues  of  the  journal  are  available  from  the  Weather  Modification 
Association,  P.O.  Box  8116.  Fresno,  Calif.  93727. 

23  Weather  Modification  Association.  "Weather  Modification;  Some  Facts  About  Seeding 
Clouds."  Fresno.  Calif..  August  1977,  16  pp. 

24  Griffith,  et  al.,  testimony  before  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977, 

25  Qualifications  and  procedures  for  certification  bv  the  Weather  Modification  Association, 
the  .lo-irnal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  9,  No.  1,  April  1977,  p.  202. 

26  "Weather  Modification  Association  :  Certified  Members,"  the  Journal  of  Weather  Modi- 
fication, vol.  9,  No.  1,  April  1977,  p.  208. 


392 


In  July  1977,  the  Chairman  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  invited  the  officers  of  the 
WMA  to  provide  testimony  on  the  purposes  and  activities  of  the  as- 
sociation. A  series  of  questions  was  also  forwarded  to  the  WMA,  ask- 
ing that  responses  be  provided  to  the  Board  when  its  officers  appeared 
at  its  October  meeting.  The  responses  to  these  questions,  prepared  by 
the  executive  committee  of  the  WMA,  serve  to  provide  an  insight  into 
the  current  position  of  the  WMA  on  weather  modification  policy  is- 
sues. The  questions  from  the  Weather  Modification  Board  and  the 
WMA  responses  follow : 27 

A.  What  should  be  the  role  of  the  Federal  Government  in  support- 
ing emergency  operations?  In  supporting  long-term  location  projects? 
What  should  the  State  role  be? 

1.  What  should  the  role  of  the  Federal  Government  be  in  support- 
ing emergency  operations? 

The  WMA  has  had  a  rather  longstanding  policy  statement  relevant 
to  this  subject.  The  statement  was  originally  prepared  a  few  years  ago 
when  drought  conditions  in  the  Midwest  began  to  seriously  impact  on 
the  agricultural  community.  In  general,  this  WMA  position  dealt  with 
the  feasibility  of  cloud  seeding  programs  during  drought  conditions, 
the  preferred  choice  of  operational  capabilities,  and  the  availability  of 
equipment  and  professional  personnel.  The  following  points  sum- 
marize the  WMA  position : 

Cloud  seeding  should  not  be  considered  a  panacea  for  drought  relief 
although  the  technology  may  produce  some  economic  benefit  if  the 
programs  are  properly  designed  and  conducted  during  drought 
periods. 

Cloud  seeding  should  be  considered  one  of  many  water  resources 
management  tools  available  for  use  when  meteorological  conditions 
indicate  a  reasonable  potential  for  beneficial  results. 

The  Federal  Government  should  support  emergency  operations 
through  a  close  interface  with  individual  State  agencies.  However, 
there  needs  to  be  a  strong  recognition  that  seedable  clouds  are  probably 
scarce  during  drought  periods  and  opportunities  may  be  minimal. 

The  extensive  field  experience  within  the  private  sector  should  be 
called  upon  to  provide  a  strong  operational  input  to  these  emergency 
operations  if  it  is  finally  decided  that  such  programs  have  a  reasonable 
chance  of  producing  a  beneficial  result. 

Because  of  the  Federal  Government's  historic  role  in  weather  modifi- 
cation research,  the  appropriate  Government  agencies  should  provide 
backup  capability  to  these  programs  in  the  form  of  monitor  and 
evaluation  systems.  If  the  Federal  Government  is  to  accept  respon- 
sibility for  initiating  emergency  programs,  it  must  also  accept  respon- 
sibility for  potential  damage  liability  covering  the  results. 

2.  In  support  of  long-term  local  projects? 

Here  again,  the  WMA  has  developed  over  the  years  some  specific 
position  papers  with  respect  to  long-term  local  programs.  Some  of  the 
primary  points  are:  The  WMA  supports  Federal  Government  inputs 
to  local  long-term  programs,  particularly  if  these  inputs  are  research 
oriented  and  are  designed  to  provide  information  which  can  improve 
future  operations  plus  assist  in  the  careful  evaluation  of  results. 
What  should  the  State  role  be? 


27  Griffith,  et  al.,  testimony  before  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977. 


393 


The  WMA  supports  a  strong  State  role  in  weather  modification. 
Where  States  have  demonstrated  a  reasonable  willingness  to  organize 
and  administer  weather  modification  activities,  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment should  encourage  and  assist  these  programs,  particularly  in  the 
areas  of  research,  monitoring,  and  evaluations. 

States  should  develop  statutes  which  address  licensing  and  permit 
requirements.  There  is  a  high  priority  requirement  for  strong  adminis- 
tration of  these  statutes  through  a  set  of  rational  rules  and  regulations. 

The  States  should  be  responsive  to  cooperative  Federal  Government 
assistance  in  the  form  of  research  activities  and  should  make  their  pro- 
grams available  to  such  "piggy  back"  activities. 

B.  Are  Federal  regulations,  permits,  licensing,  and  so  forth,  desir- 
able? 

1.  Federal  regulations  are  presently  limited  to  reporting  of  weather 
modification  activities  including  times,  amounts,  locations,  and  pur- 
poses. These  activities  have  been  valuable  and  have  apparently  not 
placed  undue  burden  on  most  operators.  These  reporting  activities 
should  be  continued  with  due  consideration  being  given  to  a  consolida- 
tion or  uniformity  of  State  and  Federal  reporting  requirements  to 
eliminate  unnecessary  duplication.  No  other  Federal  regulations  are 
considered  to  be  necessary  at  this  time. 

2.  Permits  to  operate  are  considered  to  be  essential  in  order  to  have 
a  mechanism  for  resolving  potential  conflicts  in  local  interests.  Because 
of  the  urgent  need  to  respond  effectively  to  these  local  problems  it  is 
considered  necessary  that  the  permits  be  granted  at  a  State  level. 
Federal  permits  do  not  appear  to  be  a  viable  solution. 

3.  Licenses,  as  well  as  permits,  are  granted  by  a  number  of  States. 
The  license  has  the  role  of  passing  judgment  on  the  operator,  while 
the  permit  is  granted  on  a  project  basis.  The  requirements  for  licensing 
are  generally  very  loose  in  keeping  with  our  limited  ability  to  define 
the  caliber  of  the  operator  in  definitive  terms.  The  mechanism  for 
examining  the  qualifications  of  operators,  however,  exists  in  a  number 
of  States  and  can  be  utilized  to  screen  out  the  incompetent  operators, 
if  needed.  As  our  ability  to  evaluate  operators  becomes  more  definitive, 
the  machinery  exists  to  become  increasingly  demanding  of  the  appli- 
cants' qualifications.  The  licensing  function  is  intimately  associated 
with  the  permit  process  and  should  stay  at  the  State  level  for  the 
present. 

4.  A  principal  argument  for  Federal  permits  and/or  licensing 
relates  to  interstate  transport  of  seeding  material  and  potential  extra 
area  effects.  The  few  cases  of  this  type  which  have  arisen  have  been 
handled  on  a  case  basis.  At  such  time  as  the  regular  seeding  operations 
become  more  widespread  and  when  the  evidence  of  downwind  effects 
becomes  better  documented,  the  need  for  the  Federal  licensing  or 
permit  process  may  become  apparent.  For  the  time  being,  it  is  the 
opinion  of  the  WMA  that  the  process  should  be  left  in  State  hands  but 
be  made  more  uniform  so  as  to  include  separate  licensing  and  permit 
functions. 

5.  The  concept  of  an  independent,  licensed  designer  for  each  project 
was  vigorously  opposed  by  a  number  of  WMA  members.  These  mem- 
bers felt  that  the  required  expertise  for  the  proper  design  of  a  specific 
program  frequently  rested  within  one  individual  group  by  reason  of 


394 


experience  or  background.  An  independent  designer,  called  in  from 
the  outside,  could  not  be  expected  to  know  the  specific  meteorology 
and  terrain  of  each  area  as  well  as  those  already  experienced  in  the 
area  or  in  similar  storm  types.  There  was  no  objection  expressed  by 
this  group  to  the  concept  of  a  licensed  group  or  individual  within  the 
group  being  required  for  project  design.  The  concept  of  an  independent 
designer  with  infinite  wisdom  for  a  variety  of  projects,  however,  was 
st  rongly  re  j  ect ed . 

A  further  consideration  is  the  damage  that  such  a  concept  would 
have  to  the  opportunities  for  growth  in  technical  competence  for  the 
private  weather  modification  operator.  Importation  of  the  outside 
designer  would  severely  restrict  the  operator  from  developing  the  in- 
ternal technical  stature  and  strength  so  vital  for  the  development  of 
competency  in  the  field. 

C.  Are  there  established  professional  standards  for  weather  modi- 
fiers? Does  the  WMA  have  an  active  ethics  review  process? 

Although  there  are  no  established  standards  for  weather  modifiers, 
this  matter  has  received  considerable  attention  within  the  WMA.  At 
the  1977  spring  meeting  an  ad  hoc  Committee  on  Standards  and  Ethics 
was  established.  Two  meetings  of  the  committee  with  some  correspond- 
ence in  the  interim  resulted  in  a  draft  statement  which  was  submitted 
to  the  membership  at  the  1977  fall  meeting  on  October  10.  The  draft 
was  referred  back  to  the  ad  hoc  committee  and  is  expected  to  come  up 
again  at  the  1978  spring  meeting.  The  code  of  ethics  contained  in  the 
proposed  statement  covers  relationships  between  WMA  members  and 
governmental  agencies,  the  general  public,  clients,  and  other  members 
of  the  meteorological  profession.  While  there  has  been  no  active  ethics 
review  process  so  far,  it  is  expected  that  such  a  process  will  be  activated 
following  adoption  of  a  code.  The  proposed  statement  also  sets  forth 
standards  for  individual  projects,  covering  such  points  as  staffing, 
public  disclosure  of  methods,  and  the  need  for  evaluation. 

For  the  last  several  years,  the  WMA  has  sought  to  improve  profes- 
sional standards  by  a  certification  program.  It  is  hoped  that  this  cer- 
tification program  will  be  strengthend  by  the  adoption  of  a  code  of 
ethics  and  a  statement  of  requirements  for  individual  projects. 

D.  Is  communication  between,  weather  modification  pperators  and 
scientsts  a  problem?  If  so,  how  can  it  be  improved? 

The  WMA  has  provided  an  effective  channel  for  communications 
between  weather  modification  operators  and  scientists.  These  individ- 
uals come  from  diverse  backgrounds.  In  addition  to  twice  yearly  meet- 
ings, the  WMA  publishes  an  annual  Journal  of  Weather  Modification 
which  receives  widespread  distribution. 

Communications  between  operators  and  scientists  could,  of  course, 
be  improved.  The  need  for  improved  communications  is  due  in  part 
to  the  expansion  of  weather  modification  operations  and  the  recent 
increased  awareness  of  man's  impact  on  his  environment. 

Other  means  of  communications  available  (outside  of  the  WMA) 
include  the  scientific  literature,  scientific  conferences,  personal  contact, 
and  the  publication  of  informational  pamphlets  and  policy  statements. 

Interdiscipline  conferences  on  weather  modification  should  be  en- 
couraged. Scienl  ists  should  be  directly  exposed  to  field  programs  when- 
ever possible  to  gain  firsthand  knowledge  of  the  modification  tech- 


395 


niques  employed  and  the  problems  encountered  by  the  weather  modi- 
fication operators. 

American  Meteorological-  Society 

The  stated  purposes  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  (AMS) 
are :  The  development  and  dissemination  of  knowledge  of  meteorology 
in  all  its  phases  and  applications,  and  the  advancement  of  its  profes- 
sional ideals.  The  society  shall  be  a  nonprofit  organization  and  none  of 
its  net  income  or  net  worth  shall  inure  to  the  benefit  of  its  members.  In 
event  of  dissolution,  any  property  belonging  to  the  society  shall  be 
donated  to  some  organization  or  organizations  of  a  similar  purpose 
and  character,  and  in  no  event  shall  any  of  such  property  be  distributed 
to  members  of  the  society.28 

Members  of  the  AMS  number  about  900  and  include  meteorologists 
and  other  scientists  whose  interests  and  activities  cover  the  complete 
range  of  atmospheric  sciences  and  services,  well  beyond  the  scope  of 
weather  modification.  The  organization  of  the  AMS  was  recently  re- 
viewed in  the  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society.29  Con- 
siderable attention  has  been  given  to  weather  modification  within  the 
AMS,  however,  and  a  number  of  its  members  are  or  have  been  partici- 
pants in  research  and  operational  aspects  of  the  field.  While  some 
AMS  members  are  engaged  full-time  in  weather  modification  activi- 
ties others  are  partly  or  intermittently  involved,  depending  upon  their 
current  interest,  research  funding,  or  particular  management  respon- 
sibilities. 

The  AMS  took  an  early  interest  in  weather  modification  when  it 
was  urged  by  the  Director  of  the  Weather  Bureau  to  look  into  what 
were  considered  extravagant  claims  of  Langmuir  on  the  effects  of  his 
cloud  seeding  operations.30  Accordingly,  the  AMS  issued  its  first  pol- 
icy statement  on  weather  modification,  which  was  somewhat  conserva- 
tive in  tenor,  and.  without  refuting  Langmuirs  claims  directly,  stated 
that  it  was  not  yet  proven  that  cloud  seeding  could  produce  econom- 
ically significant  amounts  of  rain.31 

The  AMS  provides  a  means  for  exchange  of  ideas  and  findings,  par- 
ticularly in  the  research  aspects  of  weather  modification,  through  its 
journals  and  other  publications,  through  professional  meetings,  and 
through  the  deliberations  within  its  committees  and  governing  bodies. 
The  society  has  a  Committee  on  Weather  Modification,  established  in 
1968,  which  is  quite  active  and  has  from  time  to  time  produced  public 
statements  on  the  state  of  the  art  of  weather  modification.  Some  of 
these  have  been  adopted  by  the  council  of  the  AMS,  the  most  recent 
one  in  January  1973.  (Policy  statements  of  the  AMS  may  not  neces- 
sarily coincide  with  those  of  its  subordinate  committees,  such  as  the 
one  on  weather  modification.)  The  1973  AMS  policy  statement  is  re- 
produced in  appendix  O ;  it  summarizes  the  status  of  planned  weather 
modification,  inadvertent  weather  modification,  public  issues,  and  rec- 
ommendations for  further  activities,  noting  that  changes  which  had 


28  Constitution  and  bylaws  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  art.  II.  Bulletin  of 
the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  58.  No.  8.  August  1977.  p.  721. 

29  "Organization  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,"  Bulletin  of  the  American  Mete- 
orological Society,  vol.  57,  No.  8,  August  1976,  pp.  900-907. 

30  See  the  history  of  weather  modification,  discussed  in  ch.  2,  for  the  background  of  this 
controversy. 

31  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector."  1974,  pp.  84-85. 


396 


occurred  since  the  previous  1967  statement  had  dictated  such  an  up- 
date.32. Since  the  official  AMS  position  of  the  society  is  that  all  policy 
statements  are  valid  only  for  3  years  after  issue,  there  is  technically  no 
official  AMS  statement  on  weather  modification.  The  1973  statement  is 
currently  being  reevaluated  and  revised;  however,  no  major  changes 
are  contemplated.33 

The  frame  of  reference  for  the  AMS  committee  on  weather  modi- 
fication follows : 

Established  in  1968  to  promote  and  guide  the  society's  contributions 
to  the  increasingly  important  field  of  weather  modification,  this  com- 
mittee is  responsible  for  keeping  abreast  of  one  of  the  more  challenging 
and  promising  interfaces  between  meteorology  and  society.  The  func- 
tions of  this  committee  are  the  following : 

1.  To  serve  as  the  official  arm  to  relate  the  society  to  the  large  seg- 
ments of  the  public  who  are  affected  by,  interested  in,  or  concerned 
about  weather  modification. 

2.  To  develop  and  update  official  policy  statements  on  weather  modi- 
fication as  may  be  needed  by  the  society. 

3.  To  plan  and  oversee  the  society's  major  meetings  and  conferences 
on  weather  modification. 

4.  To  provide  a  platform  for  atmospheric  scientists  and  other  spe- 
cialists to  discuss  the  results  of  their  research  and  to  develop  general 
guidelines  for  future  research  in  weather  modification. 

5.  To  advise  the  society  of  current  activities,  trends,  and  prospects 
for  weather  modification  by  means  of  an  annual  report  to  the  society's 
Scientific  and  Technological  Activities  Commission. 

6.  To  promote  advancement  in  the  broader  aspects  of  weather  modi- 
fication including:  (a)  the  societal  utilization,  planning,  and  manage- 
ment of  weather  modification ;  (b)  experimental  design  and  evaluation, 
simulation,  and  prediction,  and  modification  technology;  (c)  tech- 
nological mitigation  of  weather  hazards;  and  (d)  the  use  of  land 
and  energy  resources  to  achieve  more  desirable  responses  in  weather 
and  climate.34 

The  AMS  committee  on  weather  modification  has  been  instrumen- 
tal in  planning  and  conducting  a  series  of  AMS  national  weather 
modification  conferences.  The  first  of  six  such  conferences  was  held  in 
1968  at  the  State  University  of  New  York  at  Albany.35  The  first  con- 
ference was  part  of  a  call  for  an  assessment  of  the  technical  status  of 
weather  and  climate  modification  and  stemmed  from  a  recommenda- 
tion received  by  the  AMS  from  the  Interdepartmental  Conference  on 
Weather  Modification,  the  annual  meeting  of  representatives  of  Fed- 
eral Government  agencies  engaged  in  weather  modification.30' 37 

The  second,  third,  and  fourth  AMS  conferences  on  weather  modifica- 
tion were  held,  respectively,  in  Santa  Barbara,  Calif.,  in  April  1970; 


32  Policv  statement  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society  on  purposeful  and  Inadver- 
tent modification  of  weather  and  climate.  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society, 
vol  54,  No.  7.  July  1973.  pp.  694-695.  (Adopted  hy  the  AMS  Council.  January  2S,  1973  ) 

33  Ban m,  Werner  A.  (President  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society).  In  testimony 
hefore  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board.  Cham- 
pa'gn.  111.,  October  14.  1977. 

34  Frames  of  reference  for  scientific  and  technological  activities  committees.  Bulletin  of 
the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  T)5,  No.  8,  August  1974,  p.  1011. 

KAmericnn  Meteorological  Society,  "Proceedings  of  the  First  National  Conference  on 
Weather  Modication,"  Apr.  28-May  1.  196S.  Albany,  N.Y.,  Boston,  1968,  532  pp. 

36  Ibid.,  p.  i. 

37  See  section  on  coordination  of  Federal  weather  modification  activities,  ch.  5,  p.  223. 


397 


in  Rapid  City,  S.  Dak.,  in  June  1972;  and  in  Fort  Lauderdale,  Fla.,  in 
November  1974.38- 39' 40  The  third  conference,  at  Rapid  City,  was  co- 
sponsored  by  the  irrigation  and  drainage  division  of  the  American 
Society  of  Civil  Engineers. 

The  fifth  AMS  conference  was  coincident  with  the  Second  Confer- 
ence on  Weather  Modification,  sponsored  by  the  World  Meteorological 
Organization  (WMO)  during  August  1976  in  Boulder,  Colo.41  The 
AMS  was  a  cosponsor  of  this  conference  along  with  the  International 
Association  of  Meteorology  and  Atmospheric  Physics  (IAMAP)  of 
the  International  Union  of  Geodesy  and  Geophysics. 

The  sixth  AMS  conference,  held  in  Champaign,  111.,  in  October  1977, 
was  cosponsored  by  the  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers  and  the 
Weather  Modification  Association.42  This  was  the  first  conference  in 
which  a  significant  number  of  papers  on  inadvertent  weather  modifica- 
tion were  presented,  and  the  title  of  the  conference  reflected  this  new 
emphasis.  The  sixth  AMS  conference  was  also  the  occasion  for  two 
other  related  weather  modification  meetings,  also  held  in  Champaign, 
during  and  after  the  AMS  meeting.  The  Weather  Modification  Asso- 
ciation, a  cosponsor  of  the  technical  conference,  conducted  its  regular 
fall  business  meeting;  and  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board  conducted  its  fifth  meeting,  during 
which  testimony  was  provided  to  the  board  from  various  groups,  par- 
ticularly officers  of  professional  organizations  concerned  with  weather 
modification. 

Because  of  the  particular  division  of  interests  within  the  AMS,  one 
major  aspect  of  weather  modification,  the  suppression  of  hurricanes 
and  other  severe  tropical  storms,  has  not  been  a  concern  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Weather  Modification,  nor  have  papers  on  this  subject  gener- 
ally been  presented  at  the  AMS  weather  modification  conferences. 
Modification  of  such  storms  has  been  considered  as  one  part  of  the 
overall  subject  of  tropical  meteorology  and  has,  therefore,  received  the 
attention  of  another  AMS  committee,  the  Committee  on  Hurricanes 
and  Tropical  Meteorology.  That  committee  has  been  responsible  for 
planning  and  sponsoring  a  number  of  technical  conferences  on  hurri- 
canes and  tropical  meteorology,  at  which  papers  on  hurricane  modifica- 
tion are  customarily  given.  There  is  also  an  overlap  between  the  func- 
tions of  the  Committee  on  Weather  Modification  and  the  Committee  on 
Cloud  Physics.  AMS  conferences  are  sponsored  in  both  subject  areas; 
the  more  applied  papers  tend  to  be  given  at  the  weather  modification 
conferences,  while  those  on  more  basic  cloud  research  are  presented  at 
cloud  physics  conferences.  The  distinction  is  sometimes  blurred,  how- 
ever, so  that  many  papers  can  easily  fall  into  either  category. 

At  least  seven  periodicals  are  published  by  the  AMS.  While  there 
is  not  a  single  journal  devoted  to  weather  modification,  papers  on  the 


3S  American  Meteorological  Society.  "Second  National  Conference  on  Weather  Modifica- 
tion" (preprints).  April  6-9.  1970.  Santa  Barbara.  Calif.,  Boston.  3  970.  440  pp. 

39  American  Meteorological  Society.  "Third  Conference  on  Weather  Modification"  (pre- 
prints). June  26-29,  1972.  Rapid  City.  S.  Dak..  Boston,  1972,  336  pp. 

40  American  Meteorological  Society.  "Fourth  Conference  on  Weather  Modification"  (pre- 
prints), Noy.  18-21,  1974.  Fort  Lauderdale,  Fla.,  Boston,  1974,  575  pp. 

41  World  Meteorological  Organization,  papers  presented  at  the  Second  WMO  Conference 
on  Weather  Modification,  Aug.  2-6.  1976.  Boulder,  Colo.  Secretariat  of  the  World  Meteoro- 
logical Organization.  Geneva,  Switzerland.  1976. 

42  American  Meteorological  Society.  "Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent 
Weather  Modification,"  Oct.  10-13,  1977,  Champaign,  111.,  Boston,  396  pp. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  28 


398 


subject  most  often  appear  in  the  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteor- 
ological Society  and  in  the  Journal  of  Applied  Meteorology ;  articles 
of  a  survey  nature  appear  in  the  former,  and  more  technical  contribu- 
tions are  found  in  the  latter.  Pertinent  papers  are  also  cited  in  the  AMS 
Meteorological  and  Geoastrophysical  Abstracts.  Among  the  many 
publications  of  the  AMS  is  a  glossary  of  weather  modification  terms.43 

In  1973  a  group  of  scientists  at  the  University  of  Washington,  in 
consultation  with  a  number  of  experts  from  other  organizations,  con- 
ducted a  study  and  prepared  a  report,  intending  to  clarify  some  policy 
issues  relating  to  weather  modification.44  The  AMS  took  the  initiative 
in  publishing  this  report  and  distributing  it  to  a  large  number  of  State 
and  Federal  Government  officials. 

Members  of  the  AMS  may  become  certified  consulting  meterologists, 
upon  meeting  qualifications  in  the  areas  of  knowledge,  experience,  and 
character,  as  determined  by  an  AMS  board  of  certified  consulting 
meteorologists.  Such  certification  is  a  formal  recognition  that  the 
applicant  is  well  qualified  to  carry  on  the  work  of  a  consulting  meteor- 
ologist. The  fivefold  purpose  of  certification  is  stated  as  follows : 

(1)  To  foster  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of  a  high  level  of 
professional  competency,  and  mature  and  ethical  counsel,  in  the  field 
of  consulting  meteorology. 

(2)  To  provide  a  basis  on  which  a  client  seeking  assistance  on 
problems  of  a  meteorological  nature  may  be  assured  of  mature,  com- 
petent, and  ethical  professional  counsel. 

(3)  To  provide  incentive  for  the  continued  professional  growth  of 
the  meteorologist  after  completion  of  his  academic  training. 

(4)  To  enhance  the  prestige,  authority,  success,  and  emoluments  of 
consulting  meteorology  specifically,  and  of  professional  meteorology 
generally,  by  encouraging  such  a  consistently  high  order  of  profes- 
sional activity  that  unqualified  practitioners  will  either  labor  to 
achieve  this  recognition  or  retire  from  the  field. 

(5)  To  provide  a  guide  for  eventual  licensing  of  consulting  mete- 
orologists by  State  governments.45 

As  of  August  1977  there  were  169  certified  meteorologists  in  the 
AMS.  While  these  certified  consulting  meteorologists  are  involved  in 
a  large  variety  of  public-oriented  professional  services,  this  certifica- 
tion would  also  be  applicable  for  some  who  are  engaged  in  weather 
modification,  although  the  certification  discussed  in  the  previous  sec- 
tion on  the  Weather  Modification  Association  applies  more  directly 
to  such  professional  services.  A  few  meteorologists  are  certified  by 
both  the  AMS  and  the  WMA. 

Recently  the  president  of  the  AMS.  Dr.  Werner  A.  Baum.  and  the 
chairman  of  its  Committee  on  Weather  Modification,  Dr.  Bernard  A. 
Silverman,  testified  before  the  U.S.  Commerce  Department's  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board  and  answered  questions  from  the  Board 
on  weather  modification  positions  of  the  AMS.  Dr.  Baum  expressed 


43  American  Meteorological  Society,  "Glossary  of  Terms  Frequently  Used  in  Weather 
Modification,"  Boston.  1968.  59  pp.'  (This  glossary  was  prepared  initially  by  the  AMS 
for  use  in  the  Second  Seminar  for  Science  Writers  on  Weather  Modification,  New  York 
City.  Apr.  25.  1908.  sponsored  by  the  AMS  anrl  the  National  Association  of  Science  Writers.) 

**  Fleagle,  Rohprt  G..  James  A.  Crutchfield.  Ralph  W.  Johnson,  and  Mohamed  F.  Ahdo, 
"Weather  Modification  in  the  Public  Interest."  Seattle,  American  Meteorological  Society 
and  the  University  of  Washington  Press.  1974.  88  pp. 

45  Certification  Program  for  Consulting  Meteorologists,  bulletin  of  the  American  Meteoro- 
logical Society,  vol.  58,  No.  8,  August  1977,  p.  798. 


399 


his  opinion  that  weather  modification  needs  a  major  research  effort 
and  that  its  future  is  bright  in  view  of  its  potential  for  benefiting 
humanity.  He  felt  that  the  Federal  Government  ought  to  take  a  more 
dominant  role,  since  the  various  State  actions  have  been  taken  with 
little  uniformity,  but  urged  that  the  functions  of  regulation  and 
operation  be  separated  in  any  Federal  organizational  structure.46 

Dr.  Silverman  discussed  in  detail  the  areas  of  atmospheric  research 
which  the  AMS  Committee  on  Weather  Modification  has  identified  as 
significant  for  the  progress  of  weather  modification.  These  included 
cloud  physics,  precipitation  forecasting,  cloud  climatology,  and  in- 
vertent  weather  effects.  (These  research  recommendations  were  pre- 
sented in  an  earlier  chapter  in  connection  with  a  discussion  of  weather 
modification  research  needs.) 17  He  urged  support  for  a  strong  research 
program,  emphasizing  the  continued  need  for  university  research  and 
for  continued  support  by  the  National  Science  Foundation.48 

OPPOSITION  TO  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

General  discussion 

There  are  individuals  and  groups  who  for  one  reason  or  another 
voice  strong  opposition  to  weather  modification.  Sometimes  with 
little  or  no  rational  basis  there  are  charges  heard  that  various  otherwise 
unexplained  and  usually  unpleasant  weather  and  weather-related 
events  are  linked  to  cloud  seeding.  Such  events  might  include  droughts, 
floods,  severe  storms,  and  extreme  temperatures.  Often  charges  are 
made,  again  usually  without  substantiating  data,  that  the  silver  iodide 
from  cloud  seeding  has  caused  harm  to  vegetation  or  polluted  water 
supplies. 

There  are  also  cases  in  which  some  farmers  are  economically  disad- 
vantaged through  receiving  more  or  less  than  optimum  rainfall  for 
their  crops,  when  artificial  inducement  of  these  conditions  may  have 
indeed  been  beneficial  to  those  growing  different  crops  whose  moisture 
requirements  are  out  of  phase  in  time  with  those  of  the  disadvan- 
taged farmer.  A  frequent  complaint  of  some  farmers  is  that  hail  sup- 
pression to  reduce  damage  to  ripening  fruit  in  orchards  has  attend- 
antly  reduced  the  needed  rain  for  growth  of  field  crops. 

Sometimes  disastrous  events  have  occurred  during  or  soon  after 
cloud  seeding,  and,  rightly  or  wrongly,  they  have  been  associated  with 
the  seeding.  The  June  1972  flooding  from  excessive  rainfall  in  the 
Rapid  City,  S.  Dak.,  area  is  an  example  of  such  a  disaster  which  oc- 
curred nearly  simultaneously  with  cloud  seeding  operations  in  the 
vicinity  by  the  South  Dakota  School  of  Mines  and  Technology.  Though 
subsequent  technical  evaluations  disclaimed  any  direct  connection  be- 
tween the  flooding  and  the  seeding,  opposition  in  the  form  of  legal 
suits  and  general  public  reaction  persists  today. 

Opposition  to  the  seeding  project  above  Hungry  Horse  Dam 

Elliott  recounts  an  interesting  case  where  opposition  developed  to  a 
seeding  project  which  his  company,  North  American  Weather  Con- 
sultants, had  conducted  for  five  winter  seasons  from  1967-68  through 

46  Baum,  testimony  before  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  1977. 

47  See  p.  139,  ch.  3. 

48  Silverman,  Bernard  A.,  "Testimony  Before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather 
Modification  Advisory  Board,"  Champaign,  111.,  Oct.  14,  1977. 


400 


1970-71.49  This  project,  carried  out  for  the  Bonneville  Power  Authority 
under  contract  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  required  seeding  to  in- 
crease snowpack  over  the  watershed  above  Hungry  Horse  Dam  in 
northwestern  Montana.  Increased  water  for  hydroelectric  power  gen- 
eration would  result  in  less  interruption  in  industrial  power  and  more 
steady  employment  in  adjacent  regions  of  Montana,  Idaho,  Wash- 
ington, and  Oregon.50 

Local  opposition  to  the  program  was  sharp,  however,  on  the  basis  of 
the  possible  reduction  in  the  elk  population  in  the  nearby  Bob  Mar- 
shall Wilderness  Area ;  an  estimated  additional  10  percent  in  snowpack 
was  considered  capable  of  destroying  the  browse  needed  by  the  elk  in 
the  winter.  The  influx  of  elk  hunters  each  year,  spending  about  $100  per 
day  each,  was  an  important  source  of  income  to  the  area,  and  seeding 
was  regarded  as  a  threat  to  the  hunting  industry.  Fears  were  quieted, 
however,  after  a  successful  program  of  explaining  and  teaching  about 
cloud  seeding.  Over  the  5  years  during  which  seeding  occurred,  the 
elk  herds  grew  larger  than  they  had  ever  been  before.51 

Tri- State  Natural  W  eat  her  Association 

Sometimes  the  groups  opposing  weather  modification  are  organized 
so  that  they  can  more  effectively  solicit  and  influence  public  opinion 
for  general  support  of  their  opposition,  or  so  that  they  can  more  effec- 
tively bring  suits  or  injunctions  against  weather  modifiers.  One  of 
the  more  persistently  vocal  groups,  active  in  the  Potomac  Valley  re- 
gion of  the  Mid-Atlantic  States,  is  the  Tri-State  Natural  Weather 
Association,  discussed  in  the  next  section.  Activities  of  an  opposition 
group  in  Colorado  are  considered  in  a  subsequent  section. 

In  the  1960?s,  a  drought  affecting  much  of  the  Northeast  was  blamed 
in  some  counties  of  West  Virginia,  Maryland,  and  Pennsylvania  on 
cloud  seeding.  A  local  group  of  orchardists,  the  Blue  Ridge  Weather 
Modification  Association,  had  been  contracting  with  various  commer- 
cial firms  to  suppress  hail  in  the  region.  With  the  increasing  drought, 
intense  opposition  developed  against  both  the  seeding  company  and 
the  orchardists.  Bills  outlawing  weather  modification  were  introduced 
in  the  legislatures  of  Maryland,  Pennsylvania,  and  West  Virginia,  at 
the  urging  of  an  organized  group  called  the  Natural  Weather  Associ- 
ation. A  bill  passed  the  Maryland  legislature  making  weather  modifi- 
cation illegal ;  however,  this  act  has  since  been  repealed.  Though  no 
measures  were  enacted  in  the  other  States,  ordinances  prohibiting  cloud 
seeding  were  passed  in  several  south-central  Pennsylvania  counties, 
and  a  generally  negative  public  reaction  to  weather  modification  per- 
sists throughout  this  region.  There  has  been  no  seeding  for  some  years 
in  Pennsylvania.52  In  1969  Pennsylvania  and  West  Virginia,  both 
passed  weather  modification  laws  that  did  not  prohibit  weather  mod- 
ification, but  they  were  so  restrictive  that  many  operators  felt  that  their 
activities  were  ruled  out  for  all  practical  purposes. 

With  the  breaking  of  the  drought  of  the  1960's  and  several  years  of 
wet  weather,  some  of  the  controversy  subsided.  However,  the  successor 
to  the  Natural  Weather  Association,  the  Tri-State  Natural  Weather 
Association,  Inc.,  has  continued  strong  opposition  to  cloud  seeding  and 


<!>  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  1974,  p.  84. 
M  Ibid. 
B1  Ibid. 

M  Ibid.,  pp.  82-83. 


401 


has  maintained  charges  that  such  seeding  activities  have  been  carried 
out  illegally  in  the  region,  both  by  operators  under  contract  to  the  Blue 
Ridge  Weather  Modification  Association  (the  group  of  orchardists 
seeking  hail  suppression)  and  by  the  U.S.  Air  Force,  while  State 
enforcement  officials  have  "looked  the  other  way."  Tri-State  has 
charged  that : 

Defense  Department  aircraft  work  all  weather  patterns  in  the  mid-Atlantic 
States.  One  section  of  heavy  concentration  is  the  southern  tier  of  Pennsylvania 
counties ;  according  to  the  Federal  Aviation  agency,  there  are  as  many  as  160 
flights  in  a  twenty-four  hour  period.  These  aircraft  disperse  ice  nuclei  at  almost 
infinity  concentrations  [sic]  and  inject  it  into  the  atmosphere,  starting  24  to  48 
hours  before  weather  patterns  move  into  the  area.  This  seeding  will  dissipate 
all  summer  cumuli  storms.  In  the  winter,  snows  are  changed  into  rain  with  the 
possibility  of  some  increase  of  precipitation.  This  additional  winter  rain  helps 
make  the  annual  precipitation  record  look  decent.  However,  rain  during  the 
winter  leaches  the  soil  of  fertility  and  severely  erodes  crop  fields.  Snow  is  so 
desperately  needed  for  a  cover  to  prevent  this  damage  as  well  as  protection  to 
prevent  heaving  of  perennials  such  as  alfalfa.53 

With  regard  to  enforcement  of  State  laws  requiring  licensing,  and 
regulation  of  weather  modification,  the  following  accusation  has  been 
made : 

Pennsylvania  has  earned  a  reputation  of  lawlessness  relative  to  cloud  seeding. 
The  past  two  Secretaries  of  Agriculture  have  both  stymied  all  efforts  to  regulate 
weather  modification.  The  Pennsylvania  State  University  has  engaged  in  black- 
mail activities  against  those  who  want  the  law  enforced,  have  conducted  re- 
search in  contempt  of  the  law  and  lied  about  the  outcome  of  their  own  results 
of  cloud  seeding.  These  various  agencies  have  all  helped  to  obstruct  law  enforce- 
ment in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  :  Department  of  Agriculture,  Bureau  of  Avia- 
tion, Federal  Aviation  Agency,  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,  the  Pennsylvania 
State  University,  and  all  branches  of  the  Federal  Government  who  have  or  are 
doing  cloud  seeding  work.  A  meteorological  Watergate  ! 54 

Public  sentiment  in  the  Potomac  Valley,  especially  among  farmers, 
has  remained  strongly  opposed  to  weather  modification  of  all  kinds, 
and  Tri-State  Natural  Weather  Association  has  continued  to  lead  the 
opposition.  Once  charging  only  that  hail  suppression  had  caused  de- 
creased rainfall  at  critical  times  for  farmers,  they  later  also  claimed 
that  cloud  seeding  materials  pollute  the  atmosphere  and  induce  cancer 
and  even  credited  abnormally  heavy  rainfall  to  seeding  operations. 
Paul  Hoke,  president  of  Tri-State  once  stated : 

There*s  no  question  that  during  a  dry  season,  cloud  seeding  aggravates  con- 
ditions to  produce  drought,  and  during  a  wet  cycle,  it  triggers  even  more  rain 
and  probably  floods.55 

With  the  return  of  especially  dry  conditions  in  very  recent  years,  a 
new  wave  of  opposition  was  aroused  and  new  charges  of  illegal  cloud 
seeding  have  been  forthcoming  from  the  Tri-State  Association.  Its 
vice  president,  Dr.  Edmund  R,  Hill,  professor  of  earth  science  at 
Gettysburg  College  and  a  member  of  the  Pennsylvania  Weather  Modi- 
fication Board,  stated  that : 

According  to  complaints  we  get,  the  pattern  is  still  remaining  as  it  did  in  the 
early  1960's.  When  a  thunderstorm  appears  to  the  west  or  is  starting  to  build 
up,  a  plane  will  move  in  mysteriously  out  of  nowhere,  and  maybe  fly  once  or  twice 


53  Tri-State  Natural  Weather  Association,  "Cloud  Seeding  ;  the  Crime  of  the  Century,"  St. 
Thomas.  Pa.  (no  publication  date),  p.  2. 

54  Ibid.,  p.  1. 

55  Elliott,  "Experience  of  the  Private  Sector,"  1974,  p.  84. 


402 


along  the  leading  edge  of  the  thunderstorm,  disappear,  and  the  thunderstorm 
just  practically  dissipates.56 

In  a  recent  article  contributed  by  the  Tri-State  Natural  Weather 
Association  to  a  nationally  circulated  publication  devoted  to  organic 
agriculture,  the  following  evils,  supposedly  brought  on  by  weather 
modification,  were  cataloged : 

1.  Cloud  seeding  has  been  responsible  for  the  great  5-year  drought 
in  the  Northeast  United  States. 

2.  Isolated  sections  in  the  Northeast  have  experienced  18  years  of 
drought  due  to  cloud  seeding. 

3.  Weather  disturbances  in  the  South  Atlantic  [sic]  have  been 
eliminated  and  has  reduced  [sic]  the  east  coast's  rainfall  by  30  per- 
cent— rain  that  is  needed  if  agriculture  is  to  be  successful. 

4.  The  average  dairy  farmer  on  the  east  coast,  living  in  an  area  of 
cloud  seeding,  has  averaged  a  net  financial  loss  because  of  cloud  seed- 
ing. 

5.  Crop  production  losses  in  Franklin  County,  Pa.,  alone  have 
amounted  to  $50  million. 

6.  When  effects  of  seeding  wear  off,  cloudbursts  occur,  causing 
floods,  destroying  crops,  buildings,  and  drowning  people  as  well  as 
livestock. 

7.  Seeding  has  been  responsible  for  the  serious  air  pollution  prob- 
lems. 

8.  Mental  retardation  and  insanity  are  traceable  to  cloud  seeding 
chemicals. 

9.  Poisoning  of  all  living  matter  is  directly  related  to  cloud  seeding. 

10.  Emphysema  is  three  times  higher  in  areas  of  heavy  cloud 
seeding. 

11.  Cancer  is  virulently  out  of  proportion. 

12.  Financial  losses  to  agriculture  and  related  industries  run  into 
the  billions. 

13.  Forest  trees  as  well  as  cultivated  orchards  are  dying  from  chem- 
ical reactions  taking  place  in  the  air  due  to  the  addition  of  cloud  seed- 
ing agents. 

14.  The  atmosphere  has  been  rendered  completely  biologically  in- 
compatible with  all  living  matter,  which  includes  animals,  plants,  and 
humans.57 

Tri-State  reported  that  it  has  requested  the  President  of  the  United 
States  to  announce  a  ban  on  all  cloud  seeding  on  or  over  the  Appa- 
lachian Mountains  and  the  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain  for  3  years,  or  until 
a  Federal  regulatory  commission  is  established,  in  order  to  "permit  the 
economy  to  recover."  58 

Citizens  for  the  Preservation  of  Natural  Resources 

Commercial  cloud  seeders  were  welcomed  by  many  farmers  through- 
out the  High  Plains  region  in  the  1950's  when  that  region  was  hit  by  a 
severe  drought;  and,  even  after  the  drought  subsided,  interest  in 
weather  modification  continued.  In  the  San  Luis  Valley  of  southern 
Colorado,  where  precipitation  averages  6.5  inches  per  year  and  where 


M  Hill,  Edmund  R.,  in  testimony,  U.S.  Congress,  House  of  Representatives.  Committee  on 
Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere,  "Weather 
Modification,"  hearings,  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  June  15-18.  1976,  p.  372. 

57  Tri-State  Natural  Weather  Association,  "The  Rain-Making  Myth,"  Acres,  U.S.A.  ;  a 
Voice  for  Eeo-agriculture,  vol.  7,  No.  6,  June  1977,  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  pp.  37-38. 

68  Ibid.,  p.  39. 


403 


crop-damaging  hail  storms  inflict  their  tolls  during  summer  months, 
there  has  been  a  continuing  interest  in  the  potential  for  mitigating 
these  effects  through  weather  modification.  In  particular,  Moravian 
barley,  an  important  cash  crop  used  in  beer  manufacture,  is  especially 
susceptible  to  damage  from  hail  and  dampening  from  too  much  rain 
during  its  critical  6- week  ripening  and  harvest  period  in  late  summer. 
As  a  possible  means  of  reducing  such  damages,  William  K.  Coors, 
president  of  the  Coors  Co.,  which  had  contracted  to  buy  most  of  this 
crop  from  local  barley  growers,  initiated  a  weather  modification  pro- 
gram for  the  San  Luis  Valley  which  was  designed  to  suppress  hail  and 
divert  rainfall  during  this  critical  season.59 

Barley  growers  in  the  five-county  San  Luis  Valley  were  outnum- 
bered by  other  kinds  of  farmers  and  ranchers,  however,  whose  interests 
were  not  benefited  from  decreased  rainfall,  though  suppression  of 
hail  was  of  some  interest  to  them.  As  a  result,  weather  modification  be- 
came controversial  and  many  farmers  were  convinced  that  cloud  seed- 
ing was  responsible  for  the  1970  drought.  That  year  about  400  ranchers 
and  farmers  banded  into  a  group  then  called  the  San  Luis  Citizens 
Concerned  About  Weather  Modification;  subsequently,  its  name  was 
changed  to  Citizens  for  the  Preservation  of  Natural  Resources.  By 
1971,  valley  people  were  demanding  that  weather  modification  be 
stopped,  and  many  charges,  some  farfetched,  were  made  in  opposition 
to  the  seeding  project.  When  citizens  of  the  valley  learned  that  current 
State  law  could  not  restrain  weather  modifiers  once  they  had  obtained 
licenses,  there  was  a  campaign,  led  by  State  Representative  Clarence 
Quinlan,  himself  a  rancher  in  the  valley,  to  enact  a  new  weather  modi- 
fication statute  in  Colorado.  Since  sentiment  about  weather  modifica- 
tion throughout  the  State  was  mixed,  the  new  law  passed  by  the  legis- 
lature in  1972  did  not  ban  such  activities  but  does  require  closer  reg- 
ulation and  public  hearings  in  local  areas  affected.  It  is  required  that 
operators  clearly  show  prospects  for  economic  benefit  before  a  permit 
is  granted.60 

In  1972,  in  spite  of  much  local  opposition  to  the  seeding  project,  and 
the  recommendation  for  permit  denial  by  the  hearing  officer,  the 
permit  was  granted  with  the  stipulation  that  the  suppression  effort 
include  hail  but  not  rain.  Opposition  grew  stronger  by  November, 
however,  and,  at  the  request  of  the  Citizens  for  the  Preservation 
of  Natural  Resources,  county  commissioners  placed  an  advisory 
referendum  on  the  ballot  in  the  five  valley  counties.  The  vote  went 
heavily  against  weather  modification  throughout  the  valley, 
including  Rio  Grande  County  where  most  of  the  barley 
is  grown.  In  a  letter  to  each  of  the  barley  growers,  Coors 
threatened  to  eliminate  its  barley  purchases  from  the  valley  if  the 
weather  modification  program  were  not  conducted  in  1973  and  subse- 
quent years.  Both  sides  were  represented  by  legal  counsel  and  technical 
witnesses  at  the  controversial  spring  hearing  in  1973 ;  however,  there, 
was  no  concrete  evidence  presented  by  witnesses  on  either  side  showing 
an  increase  or  decrease  in  rainfall  from  past  seeding.  This  second 
round  of  permit  hearings  resulted  again  in  a  recommendation  against 


f  Carter,  Luther  J.,  "Weather  Modification  :  Colorado  Heeds  Voters  In  Valley  Dispute," 
Science,  vol.  180.  No.  4093,  June  29,  1973,  p.  1347. 
60  Ibid.,  pp.  1347-1348. 


404 


the  permit  from  the  hearing  officer.  This  time  the  advisory  committee 
concurred  in  the  recommendation  and  the  State's  natural  resource 
director  denied  the  permit.61 

Coors  did  carry  through  with  the  threatened  cutback  of  barley  pur- 
chases ;  however,  the  barley  growers  are  now  receiving  contracts  with 
another  brewery  which  seems  less  concerned  with  the  consequences  of 
weather  modification.  It  has  been  reported  that  Valley  Growers,  Inc., 
the  organization  of  barley  farmers  in  the  San  Luis  Valley,  are  pro- 
ducing more  barley  than  ever.62 

No  further  summertime  hail  modification  has  been  conducted  in  the 
San  Luis  Valley,  though  Valley  Growers,  Inc.,  still  interested  in  bene- 
fits from  weather  modification,  decided  in  1975  to  sponsor  an  opera- 
tional snowpack  enhancement  project  in  the  mountains  west  of  the 
valley  to  increase  the  water  supply  from  runoff.  Though  former  oppo- 
nents opposed  this  new  project,  they  agreed  to  discuss  the  situation  and 
aired  their  concerns  before  the  project's  sponsors  and  operator.  The 
meeting  resulted  in  an  agreement  between  project  supporters  and  op- 
ponents that  became  the  condition  under  which  the  project  was  to  be 
conducted.  The  condition  called  for  (1)  a  citizen  committee  to  monitor 
operations,  and  (2)  veto  authority  by  a  majority  of  the  committee  to 
suspend  operations  at  any  time  during  the  winter  season.  Both  propo- 
nents and  opponents  from  different  geographical  regions  affected  by 
the  operations  were  represented  on  the  committee,  and  a  committee 
member  was  contacted  for  clearance  prior  to  each  planned  seeding  op- 
eration. This  is  the  only  known  instance  of  an  organized  opposition 
group  agreeing  to  permit  a  weather  modification  project  after  success- 
fully stopping  earlier  operations.  It  is  possible,  however,  that  there 
was  less  public  opposition  and  skepticism  in  the  case  of  the  newer  proj- 
ect, owing  to  the  different  goals  and  effects  of  snowpack  enhancement 
compared  with  hail  suppression  and  possible  attendant  rainfall  de- 
crease.63 


81  Ibid.,  pp.  1349-1350. 

e2Tri-State  Natural  Weather  Association,  Inc.,  "The  Rain-Making  Myth,"  1977,  p.  15. 

83  Changnon,  Stanley  A..  Jr.,  Ray  Jay  Davis,  Barbara  C.  Farhar,  J.  Eugene  Haas.  J.  Lore- 
ena  Ivens.  Martin  V.  Jones,  Donald  A.  Klein,  Dean  Mann,  Griffith  M.  Morgan,  Jr.,  Steven  T. 
Sonka,  Earl  R.  Swanson,  C.  Robert  Taylor,  and  Jon  van  Blokland,  "Hail  Suppression  :  Im- 
pacts and  Issues,"  final  report.  Technology  Assessment  of  the  Suppression  of  Hail,  ERP75- 
09980,  National  Science  Foundation.  Illinois  State  Water  Survey,  Urbana,  111.,  April  1977. 
pp.  48-50. 


CHAPTER  9 


FOREIGN  ACTIVITIES  IN  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  Robert  E.  Morrison,  Specialist  in  Earth  Sciences,  Science  Policy  Research 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

The  United  States  has  been  the  world  leader  in  weather  modification 
research  and  operations,  particularly  since  World  War  II,  following 
the  historic  discoveries  of  Schaefer  and  others.  Nevertheless,  other 
countries  have  also  been  active  in  the  field,  notable  among  which  is 
the  Soviet  Union.  Activities  in  that  country  as  well  as  those  of  some 
other  nations  with  larger  programs  will  be  discussed  in  a  later  section 
of  this  chapter. 

Information  on  foreign  weather  modification  activities  is  not  uni- 
formly documented  and  is  not  always  available.  Some  information  has 
been  provided  through  papers  which  appear  in  professional  journals 
or  are  delivered  at  professional  meetings  in  this  country  or  abroad.1 
There  is  also  information  exchange  through  contacts  with  U.S.  meteor- 
ologists who  have  visited,  or  have  been  visited  by,  their  foreign  coun- 
terparts. However,  expenditures  for  weather  modification  activities 
in  a  given  country  are  seldom  identified,  and  the  size  and  significance 
of  the  program  in  a  country  may  be  judged  disproportionately  by 
the  abundance  or  dearth  of  published  or  other  information  received 
through  various  channels. 

Changnon  has  collected  data  from  a  wide  variety  of  sources  which 
show  that,  since  the  opening  of  the  modern  era  of  weather  modification 
following  World  War  II,  planned  weather  modification  projects  have 
existed  at  various  times  in  at  least  62  nations  through  the  year  1973. 2 
His  tabulations  take  into  account  only  those  projects  directed  toward 
precipitation  enhancement  and/or  hail  suppression;  57  of  the  coun- 
tries identified  had  projects  aimed  at  increasing  precipitation,  while 
in  14  countries  projects  were  designed  to  decrease  hail.  In  9  coun- 
tries there  were  projects  with  both  goals.  These  62  nations,  shown  on 
the  map  in  figure  1,  are  distributed  over  all  the  world's  continents 
except  Antarctica. 

Although  the  locations  of  the  performance  of  the  rain  and  hail 
modification  projects  are  shown  in  figure  1,  the  country  of  origin  of 
support  of  weather  modification  operations  is  not  always  evident. 
Thus,  while  projects  in  the  countries  of  Europe,  much  of  North  Amer- 
ica, and  a  few  other  developed  countries  like  Israel,  Japan,  and  the 
USSR  have  involved  their  own  scientists  and  resources ;  most  of  the 


xCharak,  Mason  T.,  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports;  Calendar  Year  1975,"  Na- 
tional Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and 
Prediction.  Rockville.  Md.,  June  1966,  p.  48. 

2  Changnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr.,  "Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification;  Regional 
Issues,"  The  Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  7,  No.  1,  April  1975,  p.  167. 

(405) 


406 


projects  in  South  America,  Africa,  and  Southeast  Asia  were  under- 
taken by  American  companies  or  with  American  financial  and  tech- 
nological support.3 

In  an  attempt  to  assemble  uniform  information  on  the  weather  mod- 
ification activities  of  member  nations,  the  World  Meteorological 
Organization  (WMO)  in  1975  instigated  a  system  of  reporting  of, 
and  maintaining  a  register  on,  such  activities.  This  WMO  mechanism 
for  collection  and  dissemination  of  weather  modification  project  data 
is  discussed  in  the  next  section. 


3  Ibid.,  p.  170. 


407 


Figure  1. — Nations  in  which  weather  modification  (rain  enhancement  or  hail 
suppression)  has  been  employed  during  all  or  portions  of  the  1946-73  period. 

(From  Changnou,  Present  and  Future  of  Weather  Modification,  1975.) 


408 


World  Meteorological  Organization  Register  of  Weathr  Modifi- 
cation Projects 

At  the  Seventh  World  Meteorological  Congress  in  Geneva  in  1975, 
the  WMO  approved  a  Weather  Modification  Programme,  one  part  of 
which  is  a  requirement  that  the  Secretary -General  maintain  a  register 
of  experiments  and  operations  in  weather  modification  carried  out 
within  member  countries.  Two  reports  on  these  reported  projects  have 
been  published  by  the  WMO,  covering  activities  for  calendar  years 
1975  and  1976,  respectively.4- 5  Submission  of  data  for  the  WMO 
register  is  voluntary  for  member  countries;  however,  most  countries 
with  projects  do  provide  the  requested  information.  Twenty-five  na- 
tions reported  weather  modification  projects  which  occurred  during 
1976,  while  16  had  provided  similar  information  for  1975.  In  addition, 
member  countries  with  no  such  activities  are  also  asked  to  so  indicate ; 
58  countries  reported  that  there  were  no  weather  modification  field 
activities,  either  experimental  or  operational,  conducted  within  their 
boundaries  in  1976.6  Although  the  list  was  not  identical,  the  same 
number  of  countries  reported  no  projects  the  previous  year.  Some 
countries,  including  Rhodesia  and  the  Republic  of  South  Africa,  with 
past  and  current  weather  modification  projects,  are  not  members  of 
the  WMO ;  consequently,  their  projects  are  not  reported  through  the 
WMO  register. 

Table  1,  adapted  from  the  WMO  report  of  1976  weather  modifica- 
tion activities,7  shows  the  WMO  member  countries,  other  than  the 
United  States,  within  which  reported  weather  modification  activities 
were  conducted  during  1976,  along  with,  characteristics  of  the  one  or 
more  projects  within  each  country.  Projects  reported  to  the  WMO 
by  the  United  States,  which  account  for  nearly  one-half  of  those  in- 
cluded in  the  register,  have  been  removed  from  table  1,  since  they  are 
tabulated  elsewhere  in  this  report.8 


*  World  Meteorological  Organization,  "Register  of  National  Weather  Modification  Proj- 
ects ;  1975,"  Geneva.  1976,  39  pp. 

5  World  Meteorological  Organization.  "Register  of  National  Weather  Modification  Proj- 
ects ;  1976,"  Geneva,  1977.  24  pp.  (An  addendum  to  the  report  on  1976  projects  included 
information  on  activities  in  the  U.S.S.R.) 

6  Ibid.,  app.  A. 

7  Ibid.,  pp.  6-12  and  addendum. 

8  See  app.  G. 


409 


-  modlflcat 

5 

8 

% 

e 
I 

Is 

,» 

S 

5 
| 

i 
5 

*i 

s 

| 

1 

11 

I'm 

2  8 
I* 

£ 

| 

1   Of  01 
■  ring  J 

i  S 

i-i 

as 

1 

| 

|l 
II 

i 

i 

s  ■ 

1 1 

IS 

JJ: — . 

1 

2 

3 

U 

5 

6 

n 

8 

9 

10 

iP.G 

5HTIHA 

B 

a)  5,000 

b)  1.000 

National  Anti-Hail  Programme 

34°S 
68°¥ 

1970 

r« 

agr 

(C) 

Rocket  pyro  Pbl2  400gm 
per  km  rocket  trajectory. 

-rand*-108Ce"othermsren 

reflectivity. 

Oct-Mar 

Nil 
to  dat< 

ILL 

U 

PE 

b)  60C 

HCDAPT  (feasibility  atudy  of 
precipitation  enhancement 
ME  Brazil) 

40.58V 

1971 

Yet 

Res 
(C) 

Air  dispersal  NaCl,  HB.HO 
ano  urea  at  7.5  1/min  it  ' 
cloud  base  (appro*  1500m*) 

Dec 

5 

CI 

.)  1.6,10« 
b)  0.9*10° 

MOCLIMA  (feasibility  of  climate 
modification  through  carbon 
dust  dispersal  to  absorb  solar 
energy) 

1-18°S 
35-47B¥ 

1975 

Yes 

Hes 
(C) 

G/B  and  Air  dispersal  of 
carbon  dust  particles 
(~0.1«)  by  incomplete 
combustion  of  hydro- 

- 

None 

BULGARIA 

CiSA 

M 

a)  11,000 

Anti-hail  cloud  seeding 

25.5°B 

196? 

Yes 

Agr 

(G) 

Rocket  Pbl2  at  113  tg/h 

Hay-Sept 

24 

PE 

a)  200,000 

b)  20C.000 

Forest  Fire  Rainfall  Enhancement 
Project,  Yellowknife,  nVT,  1976 
(N.W.T.  76-01) 

62.5°| 
114.5  ¥ 

1975 

In 

(o) 

Air  flares  Agl  at 

5O-700g/h  or  50-700g/20 
aec.     Seeding  level  -10  C 
isotherm  or  300m  below 
cloud  top,  whichever  lower 

J  on- Jul 

8 

a)  35.000 

b)  27,000 

Alberta  Ball  Project 
(Alta  76-01) 

52.2°I 
U5-9TI 

1970 

Yes 

Agr 

10] 

Air  flares  Agl  at  3000g/h 
(wing),   7200g/h  (drop- 
pable).     Cloud  top  seeding 
at  temperatures  0  to  -8  C 
(4500-5500m)  and  seeding 
at  base 

Jun-Sept 

era 

PS 

a)>5000 

19b8 

Yes 

Hyd 

(0) 

Air  dispersal  C0£  and  RaCl 

Apr-Sept 

HOSI/0 
PI  1 

•)  1J0 

b)  90 

Hall  and  precipitation 
modification 

S.¥. 

Slovakia 

Tee 

Agr 

Hyd 

(0) 

Rockets 

KPDBUC  OT  C 

■BUB 

H 

•)  1440 

b)  1200 

Bail  •uppr«»ion  proj*ot 
Bo#«nh»t» 

47. 8> 

12.0°I 

1975 

let 

Agr 
For 

(0) 

Air  dispersal  Agl 

May-Oct 

45 

ei 

m. 

a)  5500 

b)  1200 

Bail  Buppr«Mion  Kxp«ria«nt  of 
th«  Hungarian  P*opl*'a  H*  pub  lie 

45.e°t 
ie.5°i 

1976 

Tes 

Agr 

Ins 

Co. 
(  =  ) 

Rocket  pyro  Pbl  ,  seeding 
in  Cb  "accumulation  tone" 

Jul-Oet 

12 

Table  1. — Weather  modification  projects  reported,  by  country,  through  the 
World  Meteorological  Organization  Register,  with  U.  S.  projects  deleted.  (See 
key  at  end  of  table  for  explanation  of  columns.)  (Adapted  from  WMO  Register 
of  National  Weather  Modification  Projects,  1976,  and  addendum.) 


410 


v 


al  Rainfall  SEnanceaent 
ect  -  EXP  III 

Alto-Tegliaaento  Projeot 

Sarca-Chieee  Project 
tax  Project 


Central  4 
Southern 
I.ra.l 


*6\ 
10.7  I 


flood  control  by  cloud  feting 


Sonore  Projeot 


Artificial  rainfall 


PHILIPPHBB 


■ulatioo  operation 


Project  Ola  p- Clan 


6-}0,o 
102.5  S 


116. 5°W 


State 

apgro. 


it 


i)  G/B  gen  (42)  Agl 

ii)  Air  gen  (5) 
Agl  at  600  g/h 


C/B  gen  (6)    agl  at  150g/h 


(1)  C/B  gen(40) 

Agl  at  50  g/h 
(ii)  C/B  gen  aobile  (5) 

Agl  at  150  g/h 
(lii)  Air  diepersal  at 

cloud  base  (1000- 

2000a) 

(i)  C/B  gen  (J2) 

Agl  at  50  g/h 

(ii)  C/B  gen  mobile  (2) 

Agl  at  150  g/h 

(iii)  Air  diapereal  at 
cloud  base  (1000-2000.) 


Air  dispersal  CaCl 
solution  at  450a'/ain  ■ 
oloud  tops  or  in  cloud 
at  5000  ■. 


C/B  gen  W4I/AgI 


C/B  butane-fired  (5)  and 
electric  arc  (5)  gen  eacl 
gen  Agl  5-7  g/h 

0/B  butane-fired  gen  (9) 
Agl  at  6  g/h,  Jh  each  of 
50  seeding  days , 
Air  spraying  at  baae 

cu/ac  (ieO0-2BOOa) 
Agl  and  Pbl  solution 
20-40  1/h 

Air  flares  in  eu  cong. 
(5000 ->800ai) 


Air  flares  Agl 

Air  gen    Agl  0.16-0.2? 

l/.in 


Air  dispersal  Agl  in 
clouds  at  leap.  -7  to 

-12°C  (5500-bOOO») 


Air  diepersal  CO 


Air  dispersal  Agl  5.5g/« 
in  cold  clouds  (about 
-4°C  or  5OOO-55O0.) 

Air  dispersal  laCl  in 
nan  clouds  at  about 
2750  ■ 


Through- 
Apr-Oct 


50  g/b; 

37(.P- 
raj) 

47(fle 
".) 


411 


SPAI1 
B 

w 


il  experiment:  Valle  El 
Levant e 


SHFP  (randomized  anti- 


CTPOH  Of  SOTIgT  SOCIALIST  BXFTJBLICS 


») 

3500 

B 

•  ) 

4500 

2750 

7300 

e 

a  ) 

8900 

I 

a  ) 

5«70 

H 

4580 

E 

6250 

H 

3000 

FE 

•) 

10000 

R 

.) 

10000 

-    ditto  - 


Soodlag:  Co  for 
additional  pptn 
Wlntar  cloud  ■••disc 
for  additional  pp-tn 


42-J3 °»J 


Georgian  BSB 

Tadihlakay*  SSB 

Irlao*  (Ukraine) 
Koldarian  SSI 
Armenian  SSB 
Azerbaijan  SSB 
EratDOdarek  region 
I.  Catoani 
Uabeklotan  SSB 


Irkutsk 
teirutek  SSB 
EhabaroTak 

Chit* 

Buryat  AS8B 


45-46. 5°I  ( 
15.5-190!  J 


(0) 


C/B  lessens  gen  Agl 


G/B  dlaperaal  (rockets)  Agl 


Artill.rj  injection  Agl 


Socket  and  artillery  Injection 
Hooket  injection  AffI 
Artillery  injection  A*! 


Socket  and  artillery  lnjeotion 

Air  (en  Ac  I  seeded  at  olsod 
baaa 

Air  dl  ape reel  Solid  CO, 


Prro  Agl  and  R>  If 


Agl  150g  cartridges  at  -10°C 

(COOCn) 
I  eertridgae.  llg/lm 
Dree  cartridges  }00g 
0°-10°C  (4000-WJOOm) 


aClOj  particles 
Powdered  clay  particles  ^0* 


412 


EXPLANATION  OF  COLUMNS  IN  TABLE  1 


Col.  1— Type  of  weather  modification  (indicated  by  letters)  as  follows  : 

Cl  =  Climate  modification.  PE  =  Precipitation  enhancement. 

Cy  =  Tropical  cyclone  moderation.  S  =  Snow  enhancement. 

F  =  Fog  dispersal.  R  =  Research  experiment. 

FC  =  Cold  fog  dispersal.  X  =  Flood  control. 

FW  =  Warm  fog  dispersal.  Z  =  Inhibition  of  convective  cloud  develop- 

H  =  Hail  suppression.  ment. 
L  =  Lightning  suppression. 

Col.  2 — Approximate  size  of  project  area  :  Area  given  in  square  kilometers  ;  (a)  indicates 
overall  area,  (b)  target  area. 

Col.  4 — Location  of  project  area  :  In  some  cases  where  coordinates  of  several  points  de- 
lineating the  area  were  given,  these  have  been  replaced  by  a  single  point  at  approximately 
the  center  of  the  area.  Towns  and  islands  may  be  denoted  by  name  ;  A/P  =  airport. 

Col.  7 — Nature  of  national  organization  sponsoring  project  (indicated  by  abbreviations) 
as  follows  : 

Agr  =  Agricultural.  Met  =  Meteorological. 

Erg  =  Energy.  <  P)  —  Private. 

For  =  Forestry.  Res  =  Research. 

(G)  =  Governmental.  Ski  =  Winter  sports. 

Hyd  =  Hydrological.  Tpn  =  Transportation. 

Ind  =  Industrial. 

Col.  S — Apparatus,  agents,  dispersal  rates,  etc.  :  Chemical  and  SI  symbols  are  used.  Ab- 
breviations are  as  follows  : 

Air  =  Airborne/ Aircraft.  Pyro  =  Pyrotechnic. 

G/B  =  Ground-based.  R/C  =  Remote-controlled, 

gen  =  Generator. 


A  copy  of  the  questionnaire  and  reporting  instructions  circulated  to 
WMO  member  nations  for  reporting  weather  modification  activities  is 
included  in  appendix  P  of  this  report.  Also  included  in  appendix  P  is  a 
list  of  the  names  and  addresses  of  the  reporting  agencies  of  the  member 
countries  which  have  weather  modification  activities. 


Description  of  Weather  Modification  Activities  in  Some  Foreign- 
Nations 


THE  UNION   OF  SOVIET  SOCIALIST  REPUBLICS 

0  vervieio  of  projects  in  the  U.S.S.R. 

The  largest  weather  modification  effort  outside  the  United  States  is  in 
the  Soviet  Union,  where  there  are  both  a  continuing  research  program 
and  an  expanding  operational  program.  The  latter  is  primarily  concen- 
trated in  a  program  designed  to  reduce  crop  damage  from  hail.  In  1976, 
about  5  million  hectares 9  of  Soviet  farmland  were  included  under  this 
operational  hail  suppression  program,  whose  costs  are  met  by  the 
Ministry  of  Agriculture.  Both  administrators  and  scientists  in  the 
U.S.S.K.  have  maintained  that  these  hail-seeding  operations — under- 
way since  the  mid-1960's — are  successful,  and  they  are  to  be  expanded  in 
future  years.  The  hail  suppression  techniques  developed  in  the  Soviet 
Union  are  being  used  in  many  parts  of  the  country,  including  the  Xorth 
and  South  Caucasus,  Moldavia,  and  Middle  Asia,  as  well  as  in  the 
neighboring  countries  of  Bulgaria  and  Hungary.10 

Bat  tan  estimated  that  the  overall  Soviet  operational  hail  suppression 
program  could  employ  as  many  as  5.000  people.11  The  Soviet  hail  abate- 
ment program  is  obviously  an  important  national  effort  and  is  clearly 
the  largest  such  program  in  the  world.  Other  interests  and  activities 
in  weather  modification  in  the  U.S.S.R.  include  precipitation  augmen- 
tation and  fog  dispersal. 


9  Approximately  15  million  acres. 

10  Rattan.  Louis  J.,  "Weather  Modification  in  the  Soviet  Union;  1070."  Bulletin  of  the 
American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  58,  No.  1,  January  1977,  p.  4. 

11  Ibid.,  p.  13. 


413 


A  review  of  Soviet  weather  modification  activities  was  written  in 
1973  by  Ye.  K.  Federov,  Director  of  the  U.S.S.R.  Hydrometeorological 
Service.12  He  traces  the  history  of  activities  in  the  U.S.S.R.  from  early 
prescientific  use  of  hail  cannons,  through  the  scentific  investigations  by 
the  Institute  of  Experimental  Meteorology  in  the  1930's,  to  the  recent 
activities  in  cloud  physics  research  and  weather  modification,  particu- 
larly in  precipitation  augmentation  and  hail  control.13  Federov  con- 
cludes that  cloud-seeding  experiments  carried  out  in  a  number  of  places 
in  the  U.S.S.R.  indicate  an  approximate  10  to  15  percent  increase  in 
precipitation  is  possible.14  Because  of  the  great  space-time  variability 
in  areas  of  hail  damage,  estimates  of  hail  suppression  effectiveness  are 
difficult ;  however,  a  method  of  evaluation  has  been  developed,  based  on 
changes  in  the  area  damaged  by  hail.15  Table  2  shows  areas  of  coverage 
and  reported  decreases  in  hail  damage  reported  for  the  years  1966 
through  1970,  in  the  Northern  Caucausus  and  in  Georgia,  using  hail 
suppression  techniques  developed  at  three  Soviet  institutions  (identi- 
fied by  the  abbreviations  VGI,  IGAN,  and  ZakNIGMI).16  Based  on 
these  results,  it  has  been  concluded  that  the  average  decrease  of  the  area 
in  which  crops  were  damaged  by  hail  was  about  80  percent.17 


TABLE  2.— MEAN  DECREASE  OF  HAIL  DAMAGE  AREAS  IN  HAIL  SUPPRESSION  REGIONS  OF  THE  NORTHERN 
CAUCASUS  (VGI)  AND  GEORGIA  (ZakNIGMI,  IGAN)  FOR  THE  YEARS  1966-70 

[From  Sulakvelidze,  et.  al.,  1974] 


1966 

1967 

1968 

1969 

1970 

Total  area  of  protected  territory  (hectares  times  1.000): 

VGI  

615 

890 

785 

890 

960 

IGAN     

220 

320 

460 

460 

460 

.ZakNIGMI   

50 

80 

110 

150 

200 

Average  decrease  in  hail  damage  area  (percent): 

VGI    

90 

50 

87 

99 

62 

IGAN     

76 

82 

67 

69 

88 

ZakNIGMI   

96 

91 

94 

87 

Summary  of  weather  modification  and  related  atmospheric  research  in 
the  U.S.S.R. 

Federov's  summary  of  Soviet  activities  is  concluded  with  an  exten- 
sive and  valuable  listing  of  179  references  in  the  Russian  literature 
on  weather  modification,  cloud  physics,  and  related  research,  dating 
from  1961  through  1972.  The  citations  are  listed  under  the  following 
topics  and  subtopics,  which  give  some  idea  of  the  scope  and  direction 
of  the  Soviet  research  through  the  early  1970?s : 18 
Micro-  and  macro-structure  of  clouds : 

Studies  of  the  micro-  and  macro-structure,  water  content,  and 
phase  state  of  clouds ;  and 
Experiments  on  convection. 
Radar  studies: 

The  use  of  polarization  methods  of  radar  study  of  clouds  and 
the  results  of  their  modification ; 


12  Federov,  Ye.  K.,  "Modification  of  Meteorological  Processes,"  in  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (edi- 
tor), "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  pp.  387-409. 

13  Ibid.,  p.  389-397. 

14  Ibid.,  p.  395. 
13  Ibid.,  p.  397. 

18  Sulakvelidze.  G.  K.,  B.  I.  Kiziriva,  and  V.  V.  Tsykunov,  "Progress  of  Hail  Suppression 
Work  in  the  U.S.S.R.,"  in  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New 
York.  Wiley,  1974.  p.  42S. 

17  Ibid. 

18  Federov,  "Modification  of  Meteorological  Processes,"  1974,  pp.  402-409. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  29 


414 


Radar  methods  of  measuring  microstructure  of  clouds  and  pre- 
cipitation ; 

Orderly  and  turbulent  motions  in  clouds ; 

Radar  characteristics  of  shower  and  cumulonimbus  clouds  and 
cloud  systems ;  and 

Methods  of  identifying  hail  zones  and  determining  the  degree 
of  risk. 

Creation  and  breaking  up  of  convective  clouds : 

Results  of  experiments  on  breaking  up  cumulus  clouds  with 
loose  powders ;  and 

Stimulating  updrafts  by  means  of  artificially  created  jets  which 
trigger  cloud  development. 
Elementary  physical  and  chemical  processes  in  clouds : 

Experiments  with  the  use  of  a  device  for  modeling  cloud  proc- 
esses; 

Studies  of  elementary  processes  in  clouds,  physics  of  condensa- 
tion, coalescence,  freezing,  and  electrification  of  cloud  elements; 

Laboratory  investigations  of  action  of  crystallized  reagents, 
properties  of  crystalline  and  drop  fogs,  norm  of  flow  rate  of 
reagents ; 

Mechanism  of  formation  of  crystals  on  crystallization  nuclei; 
Regularities  in  growth  of  individual  crystals  and  droplets; 
Stochastic  theory  of  condensation ;  and 

Quantitative  theory  of  processes  of  formation  of  crystallization 
nuclei,  formation  of  crystallization  on  zone  and  its  rate  of  spread, 
technique  for  introducing  reagent,  characteristics  of  open  zone. 
Dissipation  of  supercooled  clouds  and  f o^s : 

Study  of  conditions  permitting  fog  dissipation,  and  experiments 
on  clearing  large  areas  (on  the  order  of  10,000  square  kilometers) 
of  overcast  due  to  a  change  in  the  radiation  balance. 
Modification  of  hail  processes : 

Results  of  studies  of  processes  of  formation  of  hail  cloud, 
growth  of  hail  and  its  transformation;  development  of  tech- 
niques for  modifying  hail  processes  and  results  of  experimental 
work. 

Augmentation  of  precipitation  from  clouds  and  cloud  systems: 
Results  of  modifying  frontal  cloud  systems  and  air-mass  clouds 
by  means  of  dry  ice ;  and  increasing  precipitation  from  cumulus 
and  powerful-cumulus  clouds  over  a  Ukranian  test  area. 
Extinguishing  forest  fires  by  cloud  modification  : 

Results  of  first  experiments  showing  practicability  of  work  on 
extinguishing  forest  fires  by  stimulating  artificial  precipitation 
over  fire  regions. 
Water  reserves  of  clouds  suitable  for  modification : 

Studios  of  water  reserves  of  seedable  clouds  over  various  regions 
oftheU.S.S.R. 
Estimating  the  effectiveness  of  cloud  modification : 

Estimating  effectiveness  of  cloud  modification  experiments  and 
monitoring  of  results  of  modification. 
That  such  a  diversity  of  research  is  possible  is  not  too  surprising 
when  one  considers  the  manpower  available.  Hess  notes  that  Academi- 
cian Federov,  Chief  of  the  Hydrometeorological  Service,  has  about 


415 


75,000  people  who  work  for  him  on  all  problems  of  weather  and  ocean- 
ography. By  contrast,  a  somewhat  similar  agency  in  mission  in  the 
United  States,  the  National  Weather  Service,  has  about  6,000  em- 
ployees.19 * 

On  his  1976  trip  to  the  U.S.S.R.,  Battan  visited  a  number  of  re- 
search institutions  throughout  the  country  at  which  weather  modifi- 
cation research  is  conducted.  He  estimated  that  about  600  people  are 
engaged  in  various  aspects  of  research  in  weather  modification  and 
cloud  physics,  and  noted  that  a  younger  group  of  scientists  seems  to 
be  replacing  the  previous  researchers  in  the  past  few  years.  The  So- 
viets have  also  invested  heavily  in  experimental  facilities.20 

While  hail  suppression  is  considered  to  be  a  demonstrated  tech- 
nology in  the  Soviet  Union  and  operations  continue  to  increase, 
Battan  notes  that  research  in  hail  modification  is  currently  at  a  low 
level.  He  also  reports  that  research  on  rainfall  augmentation  is  mostly 
concentrated  in  the  Ukraine  as  it  has  been  for  many  years;  but,  it 
appeared  to  him  that,  overall,  the  interest  in  rainfall  augmentation 
research  is  relatively  low  in  view  of  the  importance  of  rainfall  to 
agriculture.  Current  rainfall  stimulation  operations  are  designed  for 
extinguishing  forest  fires  rather  than  increasing  water  for  agricul- 
ture. Battan  concludes  that  the  Soviet  scientists  seem  to  be  no  closer 
to  a  proven  technology  for  precipitation  augmentation  than  is  the 
United  States  and  that  there  still  remain  unresolved  questions  on  the 
efficacy  of  the  Soviet  hail  suppression  techniques.21 

ISRAEL 

Cloud  seeding  activities  began  in  Israel  in  1948,  and  research  on 
precipitation  augmentation  was  conducted  in  parallel  with  that  in 
other  countries  throughout  the  1950,s.  Beginning  in  1961,  a  series  of 
carefully  conducted  major  experiments  were  initiated  which  have 
produced  convincing  evidence  on  the  possibility  of  increasing  pre- 
cipitation through  aircraft  seeding  of  the  convective  clouds  which 
move  eastward  over  Israel  from  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  The  first  of 
these  major  experiments  was  conducted  from  1961  through  1967,  and 
the  second  61/2_year  experiment  was  begun  in  1969  and  recently  com- 
pleted. Though  early  research  had  been  conducted  by  the  Israeli  De- 
fense Ministry,  present  research  and  operations  are  supported  by  the 
Ministry  of  Agriculture.22 

Weather  modification  experimentation  in  Israel  has  been  accom- 
panied by  basic  cloud  physics  research,  and  it  is  believed  that  these 
intensive  physical  studies  have  contributed  greatly  to  understanding 
of  the  precipitation  processes,  required  for  development  of  rain  en- 
hancement techniques.23 

Results  of  the  first  Israeli  experiment  indicated  a  statistical  increase 
of  15  to  24  percent  in  precipitation  as  a  result  of  seeding,  at  a  high 
significance  level,  while  the  second  experiment  showed  a  20-percent 


19  Hess,  Wilmot  N.,  "Progress  in  Other  Countries,"  in  "Weather  and  Climate  Modifica- 
tion," New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  p.  385. 

20  Battan,  "Weather  Modification  in  the  Soviet  Union  ;  1976,"  1977,  p.  18. 
71  Ibid.,  pp.  18-19. 

^Gagin.  A.,  "Testimony  Before  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modification 
Advisory  Board,"  Reston.  Va.,  Dec.  18,  1977. 

23  Gagin,  A.,  and  J.  Neumann,  "Rain  Stimulation  and  Cloud  Physics  in  Israel,"  in  Wil- 
mot N.  Hess  (ed.),  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wiley,  1974,  p.  462. 


416 


rainfall  increase  in  the  catchment  area  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  In  1976 
an  operational  cloud  seeding  program  was  initiated  in  the  northern 
part  of  Israel,  based  on  these  optimistic  results,  where  the  target  area 
is  the  Sea  of  Galilee  catchment  area.  Since  earlier  results  for  the 
southern  part  of  the  country  are  not  definitive,  however,  a  third  major 
experiment  has  been  undertaken  for  that  part  of  the  country.24 

Water  increases  through  the  Israeli  precipitation  augmentation 
program  have  been  estimated  at  about  300  million  metric  tons  per 
year,  at  a  cost  of  $400,000.  This  is  equivalent  to  a  rough  cost  of  $1  per 
acre-foot.  By  comparison,  the  ratio  of  costs  for  increasing  water 
through  desalination  to  those  through  weather  modification  is  approx- 
imately 700  to  l.25 

AUSTRALIA 

Although,  in  recent  years,  field  experiments  have  been  curtailed, 
there  has  been  a  major  Australian  research  effort  in  the  past  directed 
toward  precipitation  enhancement  through  weather  modification.  A 
major  research  program  in  cloud  physics,  supportive  of  weather  modi- 
fication as  well  as  other  aspects  of  meteorology,  is  continuing  there, 
under  the  Commonwealth  Scientific  and  Industrial  Research  Orga- 
nization (CSIRO).  Since  much  of  Australia  consists  of  deserts  where 
rainfall  is  sparse  and  unreliable,  augmenting  rainfall  through  arti- 
ficial means  has  been  appealing  there.26 


Figure  2. — Location  of  cloud  seeding  experiments  in  southeastern  Australia. 
(From  Smith,  Cloud  Seeding  in  Australia,  1974.) 


'  Gagin,  testimony  before  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  11)77. 
25  Ibid. 

20  Smith,  E.  J.,  "Cloud  Seeding  in  Australia,"  in  Wilmot  N.  Hess  (ed.),  "Weather  and 
Climate  Modification,"  New  York,  Wiley,  1974.  p.  432. 


417 


145°  146°  147°  148° 


Figure  3. — Experimental  areas  in  Tasmania.  (From  Smith,  Cloud  Seeding  in 

Australia,  1974.) 

As  elsewhere,  early  weather  modification  experiments  in  Aus- 
tralia were  conducted  between  the  late  1940,s  and  the  mid-1960's. 
During  the  period  1955  through  1963  four  experiments  were 
carired  out  at  locations  shown  in  figure  2,  in  order  to  determine 
whether  rain  over  the  specific  areas  could  be  increased  from  airborne 
silver  iodide  seeding.  These  experiments  were  only  partially  successful, 
owing  partly  to  their  design.27  Starting  in  1964  and  running  through 
1971,  a  very  successful  experiment  was  conducted  in  Tasmania,  results 
of  which  have  indicated  a  15-  to  18-percent  precipitation  increase  in 
winter,  though  there  was  no  apparent  increase  during  the  other  sea- 
sons.28 (See  fig.  3.) 


w  Ibid.,  p.  442. 

28  Bowen,  E.  G.,  private  communication,  January  1978. 


418 


In  the  late  1960's  operational  weather  modification  programs  for 
increasing  precipitation  were  set  up  and  supported  by  four  Australian 
States — Queensland,  New  South  Wales,  Victoria,  and  South  Aus- 
tralia— using  privately  contracted  seeding  aircraft.  The  CSIRO  oper- 
ated courses  of  instruction  in  weather  modification  techniques  and 
provided  information  on  the  state  of  the  art  to  the  States  and  the 
operators.  These  operational  programs  have  since  been  discontinued, 
however,  and  there  are  no  such  operational  programs  now  in  exist- 
ence.29 

During  the  period  of  Australian  weather  modification  experiments, 
the  funding  was  partitioned  about  equally  between  laboratory  research 
in  cloud  physics  and  the  field  activities.  With  the  close  of  the  Tas- 
manian  experiment,  nearly  all  effort  is  currently  performed  in  the 
laboratory  or  in  theoretical  studies.  The  funding  level  of  the  program 
is  about  $1  million  annually.30 

CANADA 

The  most  noteworthy  weather  modification  activities  in  Canada  are 
the  research  and  operational  hail  reduction  projects  carried  out  since 
1956  in  the  Province  of  Alberta.  Commercial  hail  suppression  opera- 
tions, supported  by  farmers  and  conducted  from  1956  through  1968, 
were  summarized  recently.31  These  nonrandomized  operations  were 
evaluated  on  the  basis  of  insurance  statistics,  that  is,  loss-risk  ratios, 
and  the  following  conclusions  were  reached : 32 

1.  Commercial  hail  suppression  operations  (based  on  the  Alberta 
project  from  1961  through  1968)  show  a  benefit-to-cost  ratio  of  47  to 
1.  Added  benefits  in  the  study  target  from  rain  increase  were  30  to  1. 
Thus,  total  benefit -to-cost  in  the  target  is  about  77  to  1. 

2.  For  the  1961-68  period  of  operations,  the  hail  damage  in  the 
study  target  was  71  percent  less  than  during  the  historical  period 
1938-60  while  at  the  same  time  no  significant  change  occurred  in  the 
control  area. 

3.  Fringe  benefits  from  the  inevitable  rain  increase  phase  over  a 
total  of  about  6  million  acres  (3  times  the  size  of  hail  suppression 
target)  yielded  a  benefit-to-cost  of  around  90  to  1. 

During  the  same  period  the  Alberta  Research  Council  (ARC)  spon- 
sored a  concentrated  study  of  hail  and  hailstorms,  and  seeding  was 
begun  on  such  storms  in  1970.  It  became  apparent  in  the  early  1970's 
that  there  was  a  disparity  between  results  obtained  through  this  re- 
search and  the  earlier  operations.33  As  a  result,  the  legislative  assembly 
appointed  a  special  committee  of  10  members  to  evaluate  the  situa- 
tion and  take  action  which  seemed  appropriate.  A  government  corpo- 
ration was  formed  for  the  purpose  of  running  a  hail  suppression  re- 
search program,  and  an  interim  weather  modification  board  was  ap- 
pointed by  the  Minister  of  Agriculture.34 


»  Ibid. 
3°  Ibid. 

31  Krick.  Irvine:  P.  and  Newton  C.  Stone.  "Hail  Suppression  in  Alberta  :  1956-1968,"  the 
Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  7,  No.  1.  April  1975,  pp.  101-115. 

32  Ibid.,  p.  114. 

M  Simpson.  Joanno.  "The  National  Hall  Rosoarch  Experiment  Report  on  tve  Alberta  Hall 
Project."  national  hall  research  experiment  technical  report  NCAR-7100-76/2.  National 
Center  for  Atmospheric  Research,  Boulder,  Colo.,  February  1976,  p.  3. 

3*  Ibid.,  p. 


419 


The  Alberta  hail  project  was  initiated  in  1973  to  accelerate  develop- 
ment of  hail  suppression  technology  and  test  that  technology.  Seed- 
ing of  the  18,000  square  mile  target  area  with  silver  iodide  from  air- 
craft was  begun  in  1974.  While  there  is  randomization  by  days  in  the 
northern  half  of  the  target  area,  there  is  full  operational  seeding  in 
the  southern  half.35  Although  data  from  the  first  2  years  of  the  experi- 
ment were  still  being  analysed  when  Simpson  wrote  her  evaluation  in 
1976,  she  concluded  that  the  following  information  would  likely  be 
gained  from  the  research  under  the  Alberta  hail  project : 36 

1.  Resolving  the  conditions  for  multicell  versus  supercell,  leading 
to  resolution  of  whether  or  not  different  seeding  strategies  are  required. 

2.  Resolving  the  merits  of  on-top  versus  cloud-base  seeding  for  vari- 
ous storm  types. 

3.  Providing  "transfer  functions''  between  crop  damage,  hailfall 
parameters,  meteorological  conditions,  hailpads  and  hail  report  cards. 

4.  Developing  and  testing,  with  an  adequate  data  base,  numerical 
simulations  of  hailstorms  and  the  conditions  conducive  to  them. 

Another  Canadian  weather  modification  project  of  some  interest 
was  initiated  in  the  Northwest  Territories  in  1975.  The  purpose  of  this 
Summer  Cumulus  Rainfall  Experiment  is  to  study  the  possibility  of 
controlling  forest  fires  through  increased  precipitation  by  cloud  seed- 
ing.37 

MEXICO 

In  a  1976  report  on  weather  modification  activities  in  Mexico, 
Kraemer  of  the  Mexican  Ministry  of  Hydraulic  Resources  summarized 
ongoing  projects  in  three  principal  areas  of  the  country. 37a 

Initiated  in  1949  with  the  purpose  of  augmenting  runoff  for  hydro- 
electric power  generation,  the  most  sustained  operational  program 
had  been  sponsored  by  the  Mexican  Light  &  Power  Co.  in  the  Necaxa 
River  watershed.  After  1954  ground  based  silver  iodide  generators 
replaced  aircraft  seeding,  and  target  and  control  areas  were  set  up 
for  evaluation.  Since  1956  selection  of  seeding  days  was  randomized. 
Following  the  1974  season,  seeding  operations  were  suspended,  and  a 
reevaluation  of  the  project  was  undertaken,  preparatory  to  a  redesign 
of  the  seeding  operations.  A  restricted  area  pilot  project  was  underway 
to  study  techniques  of  seeding  with  salt,  in  view  of  the  warm  clouds 
passing  over  the  area.38 

The  Ensenada  project  on  the  Baja  California  Peninsula  has  been 
conducted  with  the  intention  of  evaluating  cloud  seeding  techniques 
for  augmenting  water  resources  in  this  arid  region,  where  both  sur- 
face and  ground  water  are  scarce.  Since  1970,  experiments  have  been 
carried  out  by  the  Secretary  of  Hydraulic  Resources  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  peninsula,  where  seeding  is  performed  during  the  winter 
rainy  season,  using  ground-based  generators.  Precipitation  increments 
of  10  to  15  percent  were  reported  over  the  9,000-square-kilometer 
target  area,  based  on  results  of  a  5-year  period  of  operation  of  this 


35  Ibid.,  pp.  13-15. 

36  Ibid.,  p.  39. 

37  Cbnrak.  "Weather  Modification  Activity  Reports  :  Calendar  Year  197o,"  1976,  p.  51. 

37a  Kraemer,  Dieter  (report  on  recent  weather  modification  activities  in  Mexico),  in  "Pro- 
ceedings of  Conference  on  Weatber  Modification.  Today  and  Tomorrow,"  2d  annual  meeting 
of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council,  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  Jan.  15- 
16.  1976,  publication  No.  76-1,  pp.  85-88. 

33  Ibid.,  p.  85. 


420 


randomized  experiment.  In  1976  a  decision  was  made  by  the  Governor 
of  the  state  to  contract  continuation  of  this  project  to  an  American 
firm,  which  would  employ  aircraft  seeding.39 

A  joint  project  was  established  in  1973  by  the  National  Council  of 
Science  and  Technology,  the  Institute  of  Geophysics  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Mexico,  and  the  Federal  Ministry  of  Hydraulic  Resources, 
with  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  cloud  seeding  operations  in  the  area 
of  the  Chichinautzin  Sierra,  near  Mexico  City,  to  augment  water  sup- 
plies. Initial  seeding  operations,  begun  in  1974,  were  accomplished 
with  ground-based  generators,  with  the  intention  to  expand  into 
aircraft  seeding  later  if  advisable.  Based  on  analysis  of  data  from 
the  first  2  years  of  these  randomized  operations,  the  average  precipita- 
tion increments  over  or  near  the  target  area  were  reported  to  range 
from  15  to  75  percent,  depending  upon  the  specific  location.40 

Other  pilot  or  demonstration  projects  were  underway  during  1975 
and  1976  in  southern  Baja  California  and  in  the  Yacamiya  River 
Basin,  and  the  start  of  three  new  programs  within  a  year  was  being 
contemplated.41 

In  an  earlier  report  Kraemer  discussed  progress  on  the  projects 
discussed  above  and  also  included  a  discussion  on  the  history  of 
experimental  weather  modification  projects  in  Mexico.  The  earliest 
experiments  there  were  conducted  in  the  neighborhood  of  Mexico  City 
in  1947.  Subsequent  cloud  seeding  experiments  were  sponsored  by 
various  government  agencies,  some  universities,  and  a  few  private 
companies.  Lack  of  adequate  design  and  control  led  to  suspension  of 
most  of  the  earlier  projects,  their  subjective,  nonstatistically  signifi- 
cant evaluations  providing  no  valid  conclusions.42 

people's  republic  of  china 

In  1974  a  delegation  of  U.S.  meteorologists,  representing  the  Amer- 
ican Meteorological  Society  (AMS),  visited  a  number  of  meteorolog- 
ical institutions  in  the  People's  Republic  of  China,  at  the  invitation 
of  the  Chinese  Meteorological  Society.  As  part  of  their  overall  orienta- 
tion to  the  activities  of  their  counterparts,  they  learned  about  weather 
modification  research  and  operational  projects  in  Red  China.43  Such 
activities  are  sponsored  principally  by  the  Institute  for  Atmospheric 
Physics  of  the  Academia  Sinica  and  by  the  Central  Meteorological 
Bureau,  both  in  Peking. 

To  the  visitors  there  appeared  to  be  an  emphasis  on  application  of 
weather  modification  technology  over  research,  and  there  was  an 
attempt  to  incorporate  the  cooperation  and  suggested  ideas  from  the 
local  peasants  into  the  use  of  such  technology.  This  latter  emphasis 
has  even  motivated  some  experiments  which  are  designed  to  verify 
some  of  the  plausible  weather  folklore.44 


»  Ibid.,  p.  86. 
<°Ibid.,  pp.  86-87. 

41  Ibid.,  p.  88. 

42  Kraemer.  Dieter,  "Cloud  Seeding  Activities  in  Mexico,"  in  "Proceedings  of  Conference 
on  Weather  Modification — A  Usable  Technology  :  Its  Potential  Impact  on  the  World  Food 
Crisis,"  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council,  Denver,  Colo.,  Jan.  16-17. 
1975,  pp.  110-120. 

«  Kellogg.  William  W.,  David  Atlas.  David  S.  Johnson.  Richard  J.  Reed,  and  Kenneth  C. 
Spongier.  "Visit  to  the  People's  Republic  of  China  :  A  Report  From  the  A. M.S.  Delegation," 
Rulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  vol.  55,  No.  11,  November  1974,  pp.  1291- 

1330. 

"  Ibid.,  pp.  1313-1314. 


421 


Cloud  physics  and  weather  modification  were  listed  as  major  areas 
of  research  at  the  Institution  for  Atmospheric  Physics.  Although  there 
was  a  clear  historical  interest  in  hail  control  technology,  the  actual 
hail  suppression  program  had  only  recently  begun  and  appeared  mod- 
est to  the  visitors.  The  academy's  suppression  experiments  were  con- 
ducted in  Shansi  Province  and  had  been  underway  for  2  years  in  1974. 
Lacking  an  organized  raingage  or  hailpad  network,  evaluation  of 
seeding  operations  is  through  after-the-fact  ground  surveys  and  inter- 
views to  estimate  hail  size,  concentration,  and  crop  damage.  Seeding 
criteria  are  based  on  visual  and  radar  observations.45 

A  program  involving  the  seeding  of  warm  cumulus  clouds  in 
Hunan  Province  of  southern  China  is  being  conducted  by  the  Research 
Institute  of  the  Central  Meteorological  Bureau.  Intended  to  increase 
rainfall  during  arid  summers,  this  project  had  been  in  progress  for 
about  5  years.  Seeding  was  done  with  pulverized  salt,  released  near 
the  cloud  base  from  aircraft.  Although  the  project  was  not  random- 
ized, there  was  an  attempt  to  evaluate  seeding  efforts  through  visual 
observation,  by  examination  of  raindrop  spectra,  and  by  comparison  of 
rainfall  in  adjacent  regions.  This  work  was  purported  to  be  "promis- 
ing.*' 46 

There  had  also  been  some  dry  ice  seeding  experiments  during  the 
spring  in  the  cold  clouds  in  northern  and  northwestern  China.  The 
sparse  raingage  network  impeded  evaluation  in  the  mountainous  re- 
gions, and  the  program  was  discontinued  because  results  were  not  en- 
couraging. Research  using  ground-based  silver  iodide  burners  was 
also  suspended  because  of  the  conviction  that  the  seeding  material  had 
not  reached  the  clouds.47 

KENYA 

An  operational  hail  suppression  program  was  initiated  in  1967  in 
Kenya,  about  130  miles  northwest  of  Nairobi.  The  target  areas,  cov- 
ering about  45,000  acres  where  select  tea  is  grown,  are  shown  in  figure 
4.  The  seeding  program,  supported  through  1975  by  private  tea  com- 
panies, employed  aircraft  for  dispensing  silver  iodide  at  the  base  of  the 
clouds.  More  than  5,700  individual  cumulus  cloud  cells  were  seeded 
during  this  period,  with  an  average  reduction  in  damage  to  tea  of 
about  40  percent,  based  on  comparisons  of  hail  damage  from  seeded 
and  nonseeded  cloud  systems.48 


45  Ibid. 

46  Ibid.,  p.  1313. 

47  Ibid. 

48  Henderson,  Thomas  J..  "The  Kenya  Hall  Supression  Program,"  the  Journal  of  Weather 
Modification,  vol.  7,  No.  1,  April  1975,  p.  192. 


422 


Figure  4. — Location  of  target  areas  in  the  Kenya  Hall  Suppression  Program. 

(From  Henderson,  1975.) 

REPUBLIC  OF  SOUTH  AFRICA 

South  African  crops  suffer  severely  from  hail  damage.  Near  Nel- 
spruit  in  the  heart  of  the  tobacco  area,  where  citrus  and  vegetable 
crops  are  also  grown,  there  are  typically  50  hail  days  per  year.  The 
main  hail  season  extends  from  October  to  March,  coinciding  with  the 
tobacco  growth  and  harvest  periods;  consequently,  damage  to  this 
ultrasensitive  crop  is  often  catastrophic.49 

The  Xelspruit  hail  suppression  seeding  project,  conducted  jointly 
by  the  Lowveld  Tobacco  Cooperative  and  the  Colorado  International 
Corp.,  completed  41/2  years  of  operation  in  May  1976,  at  which  time 
Simpson  had  evaluated  the  first  3%  years  of  the  program.  Hail  in  the 
7,000  square  kilometer  target  area  is  produced  by  warm-based  storms, 
mostly  of  the  multicell  type,  and  seeding  is  performed  from  above, 


48  Simpson,  Joanne,  "Report  on  the  Hall  Suppression  Program  at  Nelsprult.  Transvaal.  Re- 
public of  South  Africa."  National  Hall  Research  Experiment  technical  report  NCAR-7100- 
76/5.  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research,  Boulder,  Colo.,  June  1976,  pp.  3-5. 


423 


where  silver  iodide  flares  are  dropped  from  jet  aircraft.50  Analysis  of 
the  results  showed  decreases  of  about  40  percent  in  damage  and  20  per- 
cent in  severity  for  the  seeded  cases,  based  on  a  comparison  with  his- 
torical control  data,  though  the  project  is  not  randomized.  Simpson 
felt  that  these  results  should  be  regarded  with  cautious  optimism  and 
found  the  program  to  have  sufficient  merit  to  warrant  its  continuation, 
but  with  greater  emphasis  on  evaluation.51 

RHODESIA 

Experiments  were  conducted  in  Rhodesia  during  1973-74  to  con- 
firm the  effectiveness  of  seeding  the  tops  of  single  cumulus  clouds  by 
aircraft,  using  pyrotechnic  cartridges,  to  augment  rainfall.  Random- 
ized trials  on  20  seeded  and  16  nonseeded  clouds  resulted  in  average 
rainfall  about  five  times  heavier  for  seeded  cases  than  for  nonseeded 
cases.  There  was  also  evidence  of  less  seeding  effect  under  wet  con- 
ditions.52 The  experiments  were  continued  in  1974-75,  and  it  was  sub- 
sequently learned  that  seeding  by  the  silver  pyrotechnic  method  is 
unsuccessful  when  cloud  tops  fail  to  reach  a  temperature  level  of 

—  10°  C.  It  has  been  concluded  that  economic  viability  of  the  cloud 
seeding  required  that  clouds  reach  at  least  to  the  —10°  C  level,  the 

—  13°  C  level  being  even  more  preferable.53 

INDIA 

Indian  scientists  have  continued  studies  of  warm  cloud  seeding.  In 
one  reported  study  of  the  dynamic  effects  of  seeding  cumulus  clouds 
with  salt  in  1973,  there  was  a  temperature  rise  from  1°  to  2°  C  and 
an  increase  in  liquid  water  content  before  the  onset  of  rain.  The 
clouds  also  grew  in  the  vertical  by  a  few  thousand  feet  following  the 
seeding.  These  observed  features  were  explained  qualitatively  by  a 
kind  of  chain  reaction  which  involves  the  process  of  condensation  and 
updraft  generation.54 

Further  analysis  of  data  from  seeding  experiments  during  the  1974 
summer  monsoon  showed  additional  positive  modification  effects.  Con- 
clusions drawn  from  radar  observations,  in-cloud  electrical  measure- 
ments, and  microphysical  observations  following  seeding  of  these 
maritime  warm  clouds  with  hygroscopic  particles  are  stated  below : 

1.  Out  of  the  four  seeded  cloud  cases,  two  showed  remarkable 
increases  in  areal  extent.  In  the  remaining  two  cases,  the  areal  echo 
coverage  remained  nearly  constant  in  one  and  decreased  in  the 
other.  The  echo  intensity  increased  in  three  cases  and  decreased  in 
one  case.  The  height  of  the  echo  top  increased  in  all  the  four  cases. 
Such  features  were  not  noticed  in  the  echoes  from  the  control 
clouds. 


50  Ibid.,  p.  i. 

51  Ibid. 

52  McNaughton.  D.  L.,  "Seeding  Single  Clouds  Using  Pyrotechnic  Cartridges,  1973-74," 
the  Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  7,  No.  1,  April  1975.  pp.  4.  14-15. 

33  McNaujrhton.  D.  L..  "Cloud  Seeding  Experimental  Program  in  Rhodesia:  1974-75,"  the 
Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  9.  No.  1.  April  1977,  pp.  89-90. 

°*  Ramaehandra  Murty,  A.  S.,  A.  M.  Selvam.  and  Bh.  v.  Ramana  Murtv.  Dvnamic  Effects 
of  Salt  Seeding:  in  Warm  Cumulus  Clouds.  The  Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  7, 
No.  1,  April  1975,  p.  36. 


424 


2.  The  in-cloud  temperature  showed  an  increase  of  0.8°  C  fol- 
lowing seeding. 

'  3.  The  median  volume  diameter  of  the  cloud  droplets  and  the 
cloud  liquid  water  content  showed  increases  in  the  subsequent 
traverses  compared  to  the  initial  traverses  made  in  the  seeded 
clouds. 

4.  The  vertical  electric  field  in  the  cloud,  a  few  hundred  meters 
above  the  cloud  base,  was  initially  negative  and  showed  sign  re- 
versal before  the  onset  of  precipitation  in  seeded  clouds.  The  sign 
reversal  may  be  attributed  to  the  transport  of  positive  charges 
from  the  higher  levels  to  the  lowTer  levels  inside  the  cloud  by  the 
precipitation  particles  which  are  generally  formed  at  the  higher 
levels  in  the  strong  updraft  regions.  The  electric  field  also  showed 
intensification  following  seeding  which  could  be  due  to  the  in- 
creased convective  activity.55 

THE  SWISS  HAIL  EXPERIMENT 

In  Western  Europe  hail  suppression  is  conducted  by  commercial 
firms  and  farmers'  cooperatives  on  a  large  scale,  though  scientifically 
proven  techniques  are  not  currently  in  use.  Hail  reduction  damage 
levels  claimed  by  well-conducted  commercial  suppression  programs 
are  in  the  range  of  40  to  50  percent ;  however,  the  value  of  the  statis- 
tical evaluation  is  limited  due  to  lack  of  randomization  in  the 
projects.56 

In  1976,  the  Swiss  Federal  Division  of  Agriculture  initiated  a  5-year 
hail-suppression  experiment,  conducted  by  the  Institute  of  Atmos- 
pheric Physics  at  Zurich  and  the  Polytechnical  Institute.  The  purpose 
of  the  experiment,  called  Grossversuch  IV,  is  to  test  the  translatability 
of  the  Soviet  hail  suppression  techniques  to  a  site  in  central  Europe. 
Specifically,  the  experiment  has  been  designed  to  answer  the  following 
questions : 

1.  Can  the  Soviet  rocket  method  be  used  successfully  in  Europe, 
given  the  climatic,  geographic,  and  logistic  conditions  there  ? 

2.  What  is  the  effectiveness  of  the  Soviet  method  and  what  is 
the  relationship  between  cost  and  benefits  which  may  accrue  to  a 
given  region? 

The  U.S.S.R.  claims  that  their  operations  are  70  to  90  percent  suc- 
cessful in  reducing  hail  damage ;  a  similar  success  rate  in  Switzerland, 
taking  into  account  the  hail  frequency  there,  should  permit  completion 
of  the  experiment  with  statistically  significant  results  during  the 
projected  5-year  period.57 

The  Swiss  Federal  Air  Office  has  reserved  a  space  100,000  hectares 
(1,000  km2)  by  8  km  high  in  the  Napf  Highlands,  on  the  northern 
slopes  of  the  Swiss  Alps,  for  the  experiment.  Storms  which  occur  in 
this  region  mostly  come  from  the  southwest  and  travel  to  the  north- 

^  Chatterjee,  R.  N.,  A.  S.  Ramachandra  Murty,  K.  Krishna,  and  Bh.  B.  Ramana  Murty. 
Radar  Evaluation  of  the  Effect  of  Salt  Seeding  on  Warm  Maritime  Cumulus  Clouds.  The 
Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  vol.  10.  No.  1.  April  1978.  p.  56. 

c«  Federer.  Bruno,  W.  Schmld,  and  A.  Waldvoprel.  "The  Design  of  Grossversuch  IV,  a  Ran- 
domized Hall  Suppression  Experiment  In  Switzerland,"  presented  at  the  First  International 
Workshop  on  the  Measurement  of  Hail,  Banff,  Canada,  Oct.  21-26.  1977,  Alberta  Research 
Council.  1977,  p.  1. 

"  Ibid. 


425 


east,  and  hail  occurs  on  16  out  of  35  stormy  days.  Rockets  furnished 
by  the  Soviet  Union  have  been  employed  in  the  seeding  experiment, 
following  a  brief  training  period  by  a  Soviet  expert  on  use  of  the 
launching  ramp.  The  experiment  includes  five  launching  stations  and 
a  command  post  equipped  with  three  weather  radars.58 

The  experiment  has  been  underway  since  1976,  following,  reasonably 
close  to  the  plan  of  attack  as  developed  then.  In  addition  to  the  Swiss 
investigators,  there  is  cooperative  participation  from  the  French  and 
the  Italians,  whose  contribution  is  mainly  in  operating  the  hailpad 
network.  Beginning  in  the  1978  summer  seeding  season  there  will  also 
be  U.S.  participation  from  scientists  at  the  National  Center  for  Atmos- 
pherical Research  (NCAR).59 


58  Ibid.,  pp.  2-3. 

58  Squires,  Patrick,  private  communication. 


CHAPTER  10 


INTERNATIONAL  ASPECTS  OF  WEATHER 
MODIFICATION 

(By  Lois  McHugh,  Foreign  Affairs  Analyst,  Foreign  Affairs  and  National 

Defense  Division  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

Recent  years  have  seen  increased  international  awareness  of  the 
potential  benefits  and  possible  risks  of  weather  modification  tech- 
nology and  increased  international  efforts  to  control  such  activities. 
The  major  efforts  of  the  international  community  in  this  area  are  to 
encourage  and  maintain  the  high  level  of  cooperation  which  current- 
ly exists  in  weather  reporting  and  research  and  to  insure  that  man's 
new  abilities  will  be  used  for  peaceful  purposes  rather  than  as  weap- 
ons of  war.  This  two  sided  approach  is  evident  in  the  activities  of  the 
United  States  which  has  strongly  encouraged  and  supported  coopera- 
tive efforts  to  gain  knowledge  of  the  weather  and  at  the  same  time  has 
endeavored  to  restrict  the  use  of  this  knowledge  to  peaceful  purposes 
through  the  adoption  of  international  agreements. 

Weather  research  and  reporting  has  long  been  one  of  the  areas  hav- 
ing the  closest  international  cooperation.  Because  of  the  global  nature 
of  weather  systems,  making  the  prediction  of  weather  in  one  area  de- 
pendent on  reported  weather  in  other  parts  of  the  world,  cooperation 
and  exchange  of  information  and  techniques  of  weather  research  and 
reporting  are  necessities.  This  cooperation  transcends  ideological 
differences  and  hostilities. 

International  cooperation  in  the  exchange  of  ideas  on  and  methods 
of  weather  modification  has  also  been  extensive.  Many  well  attended 
international  conferences  as  well  as  more  informal  exchanges  of  scien- 
tists and  research  documents  have  given  nations  the  opportunity  to 
expand  their  own  knowledge  of  weather  modification.  More  recently, 
pressures  of  world  population  and  food  shortages,  drought,  and  the 
continuing  devastation  of  natural  disasters  such  as  earthquakes, 
floods,  and  tropical  storms  have  made  the  development  of  weather 
modification  abilities  more  critical  to  nations.  The  increasing  interest 
in,  and  the  developing  technology  relating  to  man's  ability  to  affect 
rainfall,  prevent  hail,  and  curb  the  damage  of  tropical  storms  foresees 
a,  time  when  it  will  be  essential  that  the  effects  of  such  activities  on  the 
world's  weather  system  be  understood  and  any  adverse  effects  of  such 
modification  be  controlled.  As  with  many  other  scientific  areas,  the 
problems  arising  out  of  use  and  experimentation  with  weather  modi- 
fication techniques  are  not  just  scientific  problems,  but  political  prob- 
lems. Although  the  technology  to  use  weather  modification,  as  well 

(427) 


428 


as  the  ability  to  determine  how  successful  such  modification  technol- 
ogy is,  are  still  in  the  early  stages  of  development,  attempts  to  modify 
weather  conditions  are  being  made  by  commercial  firms  and  by  gov- 
ernments. Thus,  with  or  without  a  scientific  assurance  of  success, 
weather  modification  has  become  a  source  of  controversy  between 
nations. 

The  increased  activity  in  weather  modification  world  wide  has  also 
resulted  in  increasing  complaints  of  perceived  or  potential  damage  to 
the  environment  both  domestically  and  internationally.  For  example, 
during  1975,  at  a  time  when  the  U.S.  Government  was  supporting  re- 
search activities  to  modify  the  strength  of  hurricanes,  although  not 
actually  seeding  any  hurricanes,  Hurricane  Fifi  devastated  Honduras. 
There  were  several  claims  at  the  time,  both  in  domestic  and  interna- 
tional news  media  that  the  hurricane  was  either  purposely,  or  at  least 
inadvertently,  directed  at  Honduras.  More  recently,  Project  Storm- 
fury,  a  U.S.  sponsored  research  program  into  tropical  storm  control, 
has  been  forced  to  limit  its  areas  of  experimentation  because  two  of  the 
countries  potentially  affected  by  experimentation  in  the  western  Pacific, 
the  People's  Republic  of  China,  and  Japan,  objected  to  experimentation 
near  them,  although  other  nations  in  the  same  area  welcomed  such  ac- 
tivities. Although  the  United  States  is  ready  to  resume  experimenta- 
tion, recent  statements  indicate  that  the  Carter  administration  wants 
to  look  into  the  liability  problem  before  resuming  any  actual  modifica- 
tion activities.  The  international  community  has  also  been  troubled  by 
the  issue  of  liability.  In  November  1975  the  World  Meteorological 
Organization  (WMO)  and  the  United  Nations  environment  program 
held  a  4-day  meeting  to  discuss,  among  other  issues,  the  possible  lia- 
bility of  WMO  and  the  other  participants  in  the  worldwide  precipita- 
tion enhancement  program  which  was  beginning  in  response  to  the 
Stockholm  Conference  on  the  Human  Environment.1 

In  addition  to  the  problems  of  damage  to  countries  by  commercial  or 
experimental  weather  modification  activities,  another  growing  area  of 
concern  is  that  weather  modification  will  be  used  for  hostile  pur- 
poses *  *  *  that  the  future  will  bring  weather  warfare  between  na- 
tions. The  United  States  has  already  been  involved  in  one  such  in- 
stance during  the  Vietnam  war  when  attempts  were  made  to  impede 
traffic  on  the  Ho  Chi  Minh  Trail  by  increasing  the  amount  of  rainfall 
during  the  monsoon  season.  After  initial  public  denials  of  such  activi- 
ties, former  Secretary  of  Defense  Laird,  acknowledged  that  such  ac- 
tivities had  taken  place  during  1967  and  1968.  This  information  was 
contained  in  a  classified  letter  to  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Com- 
mittee in  January  1974,  and  made  public  later  in  1974.  Having  the 
capability  to  cause  natural  disasters  will  further  blur  the  line  between 
conventional  and  unconventional  warfare  and  increase  the  risk  to 
civilian  populations,  who  would  be  caught  in  the  same  natural  disaster 
as  the  enemy  army.  Additionally,  if  weather  modification  techniques 
are  developed  by  nations  without  corresponding  understanding  or 
concern  for  the  world  weather  system.,  widespread,  and  conceivably 
irrevocable  damage  can  be  done  to  nations  not  involved  in  the 
hostilities,  as  well  as  to  those  at  war. 


1  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Office 
of  Environmental  Monitoring  and  Prediction,  "Weather  Modification  Activities  for  Calendar 
Your  1075,"  Rockville,  Md.,  June  1976,  p.  47. 


429 


Even  the  perception  that  weather  modification  techniques  are  avail- 
able and  are  in  use  could  lead  to  an  increase  in  international  tensions. 
Natural  drought  in  a  region,  or  any  other  unusual  natural  disaster, 
will  be  suspect  or  blamed  on  an  enemy.  The  results  of  this  insecurity 
were  discussed  by  Edith  Brown  Weiss,  a  scientist  and  proponent  of 
passage  of  a  treaty  banning  the  use  of  weather  modification  as  a 
weapon  of  war,  during  her  testimony  before  the  Senate  Foreign  Rela- 
tions Committee : 

Accepting  any  environmental  modification  techniques  as  legitimate  weapons 
undermines  the  already  shaky  distinction  between  conventional  and  unconven- 
tional means  of  warfare.  It  makes  acceptable  the  idea  of  using  techniques  of  envi- 
ronmental modification  as  a  weapon  of  war.  .  .  .  Even  the  chance  that  States  will 
be  able  to  use  some  techniques  for  hostile  purposes  without  violating  the  Con- 
ventions casts  suspicion  on  the  development  and  use  of  weather  modification 
technology  for  peaceful  purposes.  In  the  long  run,  it  can  endanger  the  interna- 
tional cooperative  programs  in  weather  forecasting  and  atmospheric  research, 
which  help  us  to  understand  and  use  weather  to  benefit  mankind.2 

In  light  of  these  problems,  the  international  community  has  made 
scattered  attempts  both  to  further  the  study  of  weather  and  its  modi- 
fication and  to  insure  the  peaceful  use  of  this  new  technology.  The  Con- 
vention on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use  of 
Environmental  Modification  Techniques,  which  was  signed  in  Geneva 
for  the  United  States  on  May  18, 1977  (but  which  has  not  yet  been  sub- 
mitted to  and  approved  by  the  Senate)  and  the  precipitation  enhance- 
ment program  sponsored  by  the  World  Meteorological  Organization 
are  the  most  outstanding  examples  of  these  attempts. 

In  the  United  States,  the  Congress  has  taken  the  lead  in  formulating 
a  foreign  policy  on  weather  modification.  Passage  in  1973  of  Senate 
Eesolution  71,  calling  for  an  international  agreement  to  limit  the  use 
of  weather  modification  in  warfare,  was  the  first  major  step  taken  in 
this  area  and  occurred  over  the  objections  of  the  administration.  The 
National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976  required  the  Secre- 
tary of  Commerce  to  develop  a  national  policy,  or  alternative  national 
policies  on  weather  modification,  including  international  aspects  of  it. 

This  chapter  will  briefly  outline  the  activities  of  international  orga- 
nizations in  the  area  of  weather  modification  as  well  as  the  activities 
of  the  Congress  and  the  executive  branch  which  deal  with  international 
activites  in  weather  modification.  United  States  military  activities  and 
the  activities  of  other  nations  will  be  discussed  elsewhere  in  this  report. 

Convention  on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any  Other 
Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification  Techniques 

development  of  the  treaty 

On  July  3,  1974,  the  United  States  and  the  Soviet  Union  issued  a 
joint  statement  recognizing  the  potential  danger  of  the  use  of  environ- 
mental modification  in  warfare  and  agreeing  to : 

1.  Advocate  the  most  effective  measures  possible  to  eliminate 
the  dangers  of  this  type  of  warfare ;  and 

2.  Meet  during  1974  to  explore  the  problem  and  its  solution. 
One  year  prior  to  this  communique,  the  Senate  had  adopted  by  a 

2  U.S.  Congress,  Senate,  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and  International  Environment,  "Pro- 
hibiting Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification  Techniques,"  hearing,  94th  Cong.,  2d 
sess.,  Jan.  21,  1976,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1976,  p.  29. 

34-857—79  30 


430 


large  majority  a  resolution  calling  upon  the  U.S.  Government  to  nego- 
tiate a  treaty  controlling  the  use  of  environmental  modification  as  a 
weapon  of  war. 

On  August  7,  1974,  Soviet  Foreign  Minister  Gromyko  sent  a  letter 
to  the  Secretary-General  of  the  United  Nations  asking  that  a  resolu- 
tion advocating  the  conclusion  of  an  international  convention  prohib- 
iting environmental  modification  for  military  purposes  be  added  to  the 
agenda  of  the  1974  U.N.  General  Assembly.3  The  Soviet  Union  sub- 
mitted, on  September  24, 1974  a  resolution  calling  for  a  convention  and 
a  draft  convention  entitled  "Prohibition  of  Action  to  Influence  the 
Environment  and  Climate  for  Military  and  Other  Purposes  Incompati- 
ble with  the  Maintenance  of  International  Security,  Human  Well- 
Being  and  Health."  4 

The  proposed  convention  was  quite  far  reaching.  For  example, 
article  1  stated  that  each  party  to  the  convention  "undertakes  not  to 
develop  meteorological,  geophysical  or  any  other  scientific  technologi- 
cal means  of  influencing  the  environment,  including  the  weather  and 
climate,  for  military  and  other  purposes  incompatible  with  the  mainte- 
nance of  international  security,  human  well-being  and  health,  and, 
furthermore,  never  under  any  circumstances  to  resort  to  such  means  of 
influencing  the  environment  and  climate  or  to  carry  out  preparations 
for  their  use."  Article  2  listed  1 2  specific  activities  which  were  to  be 
prohibited.  Other  articles  prohibited  parties  from  assisting  other 
states  in  such  activities  and  noted  that  nothing  in  the  convention  was 
meant  to  impede  scientific  progress  or  the  development  of  methods  to 
improve  the  environment  for  peaceful  purposes.  Violations  were  to  be 
reported  to  the  Security  Council,  and  parties  would  adopt  national 
controls  to  prevent  their  citizens  from  taking  actions  contrary  to  the 
treaty.  After  5  years  a  conference  of  the  parties  would  be  held  to  revise 
the  convention  if  necessary  in  light  of  scientific  developments.5 

After  debate,  the  General  Assembly  amended  the  resolution  to  elim- 
inate some  of  the  ambiguities  the  members  found,  adopted  it  on 
December  9,  1974,  and  requested  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on 
Disarmament  (CCD)  to  proceed  "as  soon  as  possible  to  achieving 
agreement  on  the  text  of  such  a  convention"  as  the  one  proposed  by  the 
Soviet  Union  and  to  submit  a  report  on  the  finding  to  the  next  session  of 
the  General  Assembly.6  (The  United  States  abstained  on  this  vote 
after  noting  in  the  debate  that  the  problem  had  not  been  defined  and 
it  was  premature  to  conclude  that  a  convention  would  be  feasible  or 
effective.)  7 


3  United  Nations  mimeographed  document  Xo.  A/9702.  1074. 

4  United  Nations  mimeocrraphed  document  Xo.  A/C1/L675,  1974. 

5  United  Nations  document  A/9910,  Dec.  6,  1974. 

6  A/Res/3264  (XXIX) . 

7  Senator  Stuart  Symington,  a  member  of  the  U.S.  delegation  to  the  29th  session  of  the 
United  Xations  General  Assembly  summed  up  the  reasons  for  the  United  States  stand  as 
follows  : 

"The  public  explanation  of  our  stand  was  that  'even  with  the  commendable  changes  ac- 
cepted by  the  Soviet  delegation,  the  resolution  as  it  now  stands  still  appears  to  prejudge  how 
the  committee  would  consider  the  question.' 

"The  reason  for  our  abstention  appeared  to  be  the  fear  that  this  general  recommendation 
might  result  years  hence  in  a  treaty,  subject  to  a  two-third  vote  of  approval  by  the  Senate, 
tbal  in  some  respect  the  executive  branch  might  not  like.  This  fear  to  explore  even  the  pos- 
sibility of  a  legal  regime  for  environmental  modification  seems  to  approach  excessive 
caution." 

U.S.  Congress.  Senate.  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  "The  United  Xations.  the  United 
States  and  Anns  Control."  report  by  Senator  Stuart  Symington,  member  of  the  delegation 
to  the  United  Xations.  May  197.".  94th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  committee  print,  Washington.  U.S. 
Government  Printing  Office,  197"5,  p.  4. 


431 


Early  in  November  1974,  the  United  States  and  the  Soviet  Union 
>egan  meeting  to  develop  a  joint  approach  to  a  treaty  prohibiting  the 
ise  of  environmental  modification  as  a  weapon  of  war.  These  meetings 
continued  through  the  summer  of  1975.  During  the  summer  of  1975, 
he  CCD  was  also  holding  meetings  on  the  draft  convention  proposed 
jy  the  Soviet  Union  in  September  1974.  In  August  of  1975,  the  Soviet 
Jnion  and  the  United  States  submitted  identical  draft  conventions  to 
he  CCD.  At  the  time  the  U.S.  delegate  noted  that  the  submission  of 
dentical  texts  was  important,  that  the  major  issues  had  been  identified 
ind  that  discussions  had  shown  that  a  consensus  had  clearly  been 
eached  on  the  desirability  of  achieving  such  an  agreement.8 

On  July  1,  1976,  the  CCD  established  a  working  group  to  consider 
he  modifications  of  the  joint  draft  convention  and  in  early  September 
ransmitted  a  completed  draft  convention  to  the  United  Nations  Gen- 
•ral  Assembly.  The  General  Assembly  adopted  the  resolution,  calling 
:or  acceptance  of  the  draft  convention  on  December  10, 1976,  by  a  re- 
:orded  vote  of  96  to  8  with  30  abstentions.9 

The  resolution  directed  the  Secretary  General  to  open  the  conven- 
ion  for  signature  and  ratifications.  The  convention  was  opened  for 
ignature  in  Geneva  on  May  18,  1977,  and  was  signed  by  the  United 
States  and  33  other  nations. 

CRITICISM  OF  THE  CONVENTION 

Even  before  the  Convention  wac  opened  for  signature,  there  was  a 
rreat  deal  of  criticism  of  its  contents.  Critics  claimed  that  it  contained 
oopholes  that  seriously  weakened  the  treaty.  One  action  taken  by  sev- 
ral  environmental  groups  was  to  file  a  law  suit  against  the  State  De- 
)artment  on  the  grounds  that  the  Department  was  required  to  file  an 
nvironmental  impact  statement  on  the  effects  of  the  Convention. 

In  addition  to  these  environmental  groups,  several  members  of  the 
United  Nations,  scientists  and  members  of  Congress  have  been  critical 
>f  the  Convention.  The  main  criticism  is  that  the  treaty  only  partially 
>ans  environmental  modification  techniques  in  warfare.  The  question- 
ible  language  is  centered  in  the  language  of  article  I,  which  reads : 

Each  State  Party  to  this  convention  undertakes  not  to  engage  in  military  or 
ny  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  having  ivide- 
pread,  long-lasting,  or  severe  effects  as  the  means  of  destruction,  damage  or  in- 
ury  to  another  State  Party.  [Emphasis  added.]  10 

The  italicized  language  is  the  so-called  troika  language,  which  was 
iot  in  the  original  Soviet  draft,  but  was  used  in  the  joint  Soviet/ 
Jnited  States  communique,  leading  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  added 
.t  the  insistence  of  the  United  States. 

In  a  paper  prepared  for  the  General  Assembly  debate,  the  Govern- 
ment of  Mexico  called  this  phrase  "in  every  respect  inadequate  and 
mbiguous.11  And  Dr.  Edith  Brown  "Weiss,  in  testifying  on  January  21, 
976,  before  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Committee  stated : 

Article  1  indicates  that  the  convention  covers  only  environmental  modification 
?chniques  "having  widespread,  long-lasting,  or  severe  effects".  Ironically,  the 


5  United  Nations.  General  Assembly,  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarmament,  re- 
ort.  vol.  I.  New  York,  United  Nations.  1976,  p.  61.  (United  Nations,  document  A/31/27 
nited  Nations.  General  Assembly,  official  records.  31st  sess.  suppl.  No.  27.) 

9  Text  of  the  resolution  published  in  the  Department  of  State  bulletin,  Jan.  1,  1977.  pp. 
6-29. 

10  Text  of  treaty  included  in  app.  C. 

n  See  United  Nations  Document  No.  A/C.1/31/S  Nov.  16,  1976,  p.  2. 


432 


language  sounds  like  it  covers  only  those  techniques  which  are  least  developed — 
such  as  techniques  for  climate  modification.  .  .  .  There  are  important  ambiguities 
in  this  draft  about  the  extent  to  which  weather  modification  activities  are  cov- 
ered by  its  prohibitions  and  about  whether  the  use  of  environmental  modification 
techniques  incidental  to  facilitating  the  effectiveness  of  other  weapons  is 
covered.12 

Secondly,  the  Convention  was  criticized  for  its  lack  of  effective  en- 
forcement procedures.  Complaints  of  violations  of  the  Convention  are 
to  be  referred  to  the  Security  Council  where  both  the  United  States  and 
the  Soviet  Union,  the  countries  with  the  leading  capabilities  to  develop 
technology  for  weather  warfare,  have  a  veto.  Critics  contend  that  giv- 
ing the  power  to  investigate  violations  and  determine  whether  dam- 
ages can  be  claimed  to  the  veto-prone  Security  Council  makes  enforce- 
ment of  the  treaty  impossible. 

In  defending  the  proposed  treaty  to  Congressman  Gilbert  Gude.  the 
Director  of  the  U.S.  Arms  Control  and  Disarmament  Agency,  Fred  C. 
Ickle,  wrote  in  September  24, 1975  : 

The  anticipatory  nature  of  the  proposed  Convention  carries  with  it  many  of 
the  basic  uncertainties  of  the  future,  and  I  anticipate  criticisms  of  different 
aspects  of  the  agreement  from  several  sides.  The  alternative  to  action  now  would 
be  to  attempt  restraint  at  a  later  time,  when  the  possibilities  of  hostile  use  of 
environmental  modification  techniques  may  be  more  real.  An  agreement  on  pro- 
hibitions might  then  be  more  difficult  to  achieve.13 

In  a  f  ollowup  letter  to  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Committee  com- 
menting on  the  comments  of  Dr.  Weiss,  Mr.  Ickle  stated : 

Because  certain  effects  are  not  listed,  she  questions  whether  all  uses  are  pro- 
hibited. The  presence  or  absence  of  any  technique  in  the  list  does  not  indicate 
that  it  is  allowed  or  prohibited — all  hostile  uses  of  all  environmental  modifica- 
tion techniques  having  widespread,  long-lasting,  or  severe  effects  would  be  pro- 
hibited by  the  Convention.14 

Finally,  concerning  the  enforcement  procedures,  this  same  letter 
commented : 

It  is  unlikely,  as  a  practical  matter,  that  a  permanent  member  of  the  Security 
Council  would  exercise  its  veto  to  prevent  an  investigation  of  a  complaint 
brought  against  it  (or  an  ally),  since  such  an  act  would  probably  be  taken  as 
confirmation  of  a  violation  by  many  UN  members.15 

The  Convention,  as  approved  by  the  General  Assembly,  calls  upon 
the  parties  to  look  again  at  the  provisions  of  the  Convention  in  5  years 
time  to  insure  that  the  Convention  is  in  fact  fulfilling  its  purpose.  This 
will  give  critics  an  opportunity  to  strengthen  the  Convention. 

ACTIVITIES  SINCE  THE  UNITED  NATIONS  APPROVAL  OF  THE  CONVENTION 

The  Convention  was  opened  for  signature  on  May  18, 1977.  At  that 
time  Secretary  of  State  Vance  made  a  statement  which  many  regarded 
as  an  indication  that  the  United  States  was  willing  to  reexamine  the 
use  of  the  so-called  troika  language.  His  comments  were : 

In  the  view  of  the  United  States,  the  effect  of  the  convention  should  be  to  elimi- 
nate the  danger  of  environmental  warfare  because  it  prohibits  all  significant 


12  U.S.  Congress.  Senate,  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and 
Internationa]  Environment.  "Prohibiting  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modifications  Tech- 
niques.-' hearing,  Jan.  21,  1976,  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Print- 
ing Offipp.  1976. 

»  Ibid.,  p.  6. 

M  Ibid.,  p.  18. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  17. 


433 


hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques.  According  to  the  present 
terms,  the  convention  limits  the  prohibition  to  those  uses  having  "widespread, 
long-lasting  or  severe  effects."  The  United  States  will  be  prepared  to  reexamine 
this  limitation  on  the  scope  of  the  convention  at  the  review  conference  or  pos- 
sibly before.16 

In  the  fall  of  1977,  the  law  suit  against  the  Department  of  State  was 
dropped  when  the  Department  agreed  to  prepare  an  environmental 
assessment  statement  (not  an  environmental  impact  statement),  and 
submit  it  to  the  Senate  with  the  Convention.  According  to  the  Depart- 
ment of  State,  this  statement  will  discuss  what  the  Convention  does,  in 
the  Department's  understanding,  what  weather  modification  tech- 
niques are  currently  available  and  thus  covered  by  the  Convention,  and 
will  state  that  the  only  use  of  weather  modification  for  hostile  use  ever 
engaged  in  by  the  United  States  was  in  Vietnam  (see  section  on  con- 
gressional activities).17  The  way  has  now  been  cleared  for  transmittal 
of  the  Convention  to  the  Senate,  which  is  expected  to  take  place  during 
1979. 

As  of  mid  1978,  50  nations  had  signed  the  Convention,  and  19  had 
ratified  it. 

Activities  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization  in  Weather 

Modification 

The  World  Meteorological  Organization  (WMO)  has  been  a  special- 
ized agency  of  the  United  Nations  since  1951,  although  its  predecessor, 
a  nongovernmental  organization,  the  International  Meteorological  Or- 
ganization, dates  to  1873.  WMO's  responsibilities  include  the  coordina- 
tion, standardization,  and  improvement  of  meteorological  services 
throughout  the  world  and  the  encouragement  of  an  efficient  exchange 
of  meteorological  information  between  countries. 

The  WMO  is  the  international  organization  which  historically  more 
than  any  other  has  been  involved  in  various  aspects  of  weather  modi- 
fication. According  to  a  WMO  background  paper  prepared  for  the  pre- 
cipitation enhancement  project  WMO  activities  in  the  area  of  weather 
modification  began  as  early  as  1955  with  the  publication  of  a  technical 
note  (study)  devoted  to  the  scientific  aspects  of  cloud  and  precipita- 
tion control.18  By  the  early  1970?s  the  general  awareness  and  interest  in 
inadvertent  as  well  as  planned  weather  modification  had  increased  to 
the  point  that  WMO  felt  it  necessary  to  issue  guidelines  to  handle  in- 
quiries from  member  nations  on  weather  modification.  The  statement, 
entitled  "Present  State  of  Knowledge  and  Possible  Practical  Bene- 
fits in  Some  Fields  of  Weather  Modification"  was  first  published  in 
1971,  and  revised  and  amplified  in  1975. 

By  1972  WMO  found  it  necessary  to  issue  "Guidelines  for  Advice 
and  Assistance  Related  to  the  Planning  of  Weather  Modification  Ac- 
tivities" in  order  to  answer  the  more  specific  questions  being  asked  of 
WMO.  At  the  same  time,  a  working  commission  of  WMO  was  desig- 
nated as  a  panel  of  experts  on  weather  modification  for  the  WMO, 
thus  creating  a  permanent  panel  to  monitor  and  study  weather 
modification. 


16  "United  States  Signs  Convention  Banning  Environmental  Warfare,"  statement  by  Sec- 
retary Vance,  Department  of  State  bulletin,  June  13,  1977,  pp.  633^. 

17  See  p.  441. 

18  World  Meteorological  Organization,  "Plan  for  the  Precipitation  Enhancement  Project 
(PEP),"  PEP  report  No.  3,  Geneva,  November  1976. 


434 


PRECIPITATION  ENHANCEMENT  PROGRAM  (PEP) 

Following  a  world  wide  survey  of  weather  modification  activities 
and  interests  in  1972  and  1973,  the  WMO  concluded  that  it  should  be- 
come more  active  in  weather  modification  and  during  1974  began  for- 
mulating a  program  on  weather  modification  and  estimating  its  costs 
with  the  view  that  these  could  be  studied  and  implemented  during  the 
1976-79  financial  period.  The  WMO  Weather  Modification  Pro- 
gramme was  adopted  in  1975.  At  the  time,  the  WMO  Congress  stated 
that: 

WMO  was  the  appropriate  international  body  with  the  necessary  scientific  and 
technical  expertise  in  this  field,  and  agreed  that  the  time  had  come  for  the  organi- 
zation to  become  more  active  in  order  to  provide  the  best  possible  advice  to  mem- 
bers, the  United  Nations  and  other  international  organizations  concerning 
weather  modification.  In  view  of  the  urgent  need  to  find  ways  of  increasing  world 
food  production  and  conserving  water  supplies,  it  was  agreed  that  priority  in  this 
field  had  to  be  given  to  increasing  precipitation. 

Considering  that  the  results  of  most  rainmaking  projects  up  to  that  time  had 
been  inconclusive  because  of  the  lack  of  sound  scientific  planning,  operation  and 
evaluation,  Congress  agreed  that  scientifically  convincing  answers  concerning  the 
feasibility  of  precipitation  enhancement  could  best  be  advanced  through  an  in- 
ternationally planned,  executed  and  evaluated  experiment  in  precipitation  stimu- 
lation.19 ( 

Thus  the  major  element  of  the  new  Weather  Modification  Pro- 
gramme would  be  a  precipitation  enhancement  project  (PEP).  The 
aim  of  PEP  is  to  plan,  set  up,  and  carry  out  an  international,  scien- 
tifically controlled  precipitation  enhancement  experiment  in  a  semiarid 
region  under  conditions  where  the  chances  of  increasing  precipitation 
on  the  ground  in  amounts  big  enough  to  produce  economic  benefits  are 
optimal.  The  objectives  listed  by  WMO  are  as  follows : 

(a)  To  provide  members  with  reliable  information  about  the 
probabilities  of  successful  artificial  intervention  in  meteorological 
processes  with  the  object  of  increasing  the  amount  of  precipitation, 
over  an  area  of  the  order  of  10,000  km2.  The  size  of  the  area  for  the 
proposed  project  (that  is,  the  target  and  nearby  control  areas) 
should  be  somewhere  around  50,000  km2,  a  scale  large  enough  to 
provide  adequate  evaluation  of  scientific  feasibility  and  economic 
benefit,  but  small  enough  to  permit  the  use  of  adequate  methods  for 
seeding  and  observations ; 

(b)  To  demonstrate  at  a  satisfactory  statistical  significance  level 
over  a  relatively  short  experimental  period  (5  years)  that  any 
increase  observed  is  not  a  chance  event  but  is  associated  with  the 
seeding.  The  principal  evaluation  of  this  experiment  will  be  in 
terms  of  precipitation  at  the  ground; 

(e)  To  obtain  sufficient  understanding  of  the  meteorology  and 
cloud  physics  in  the  area  of  the  experiment  to  insure  that  the  sta- 
tistical association  of  seeding  and  any  increase  in  precipitation 
will  be  generally  acceptable  as  a  cause-and-effect  relationship; 

(V)  To  make  an  examination  outside  the  target  area  in  order 
to  determine  whether  any  benefits  of  seeding  extend  over  areas 
greater  than  the  target  area,  or  whether  there  1ms  merely  been  a 
romparatively  local  redistribution  of  precipitation; 


18  Ibid.,  p.  21. 


435 


(e)  To  make  systematic  measurements  varying  from  mesoscale 
to  cloud  micostructure  in  order  to  develop  additional  covariates  to 
strengthen  the  power  of  the  statistical  analysis ; 

(/)  To  obtain  well  documented  scientific  evidence  that  may  lead 
to  the  optimization  of  the  effects  of  seeding.  For  this  purpose  a 
series  of  systematic  cloud  physics  measurements  should  be  taken 
on  a  routine  basis.  This  would  allow  the  application  of  statistical 
stratification  techniques  to  relevant  physical  parameters,  and 
could  shed  more  light  on  the  quantitative  aspects  of  the  seeding 
technique ; 

(g)  To  be  able  to  make  some  recommendations  about  the  ap- 
plicability of  the  PEP  procedures  to  other  areas  of  the  world; 
and 

(h)  To  make  an  assessment  of  the  environmental  impact  of 
precipitation  enhancement  activities  both  within  and  outside  the 
experiment  target  area.20 

The  plan  for  PEP  is  divided  into  three  phases.  A  preparatory  and 
site  selection  phase  of  at  least  2  years  will  develop  criteria  for  the 
selection  of  regions  and  sites,  develop  the  plan  for  the  precipitation 
enhancement  experiment,  and  select  the  sites  to  be  used.  This  phase  has 
already  begun.  The  second  phase  will  be  the  actual  scientific  field 
experiment  and  will  last  5  years.  The  third  phase  will  be  an  evaluation 
of  the  results.  While  this  will  begin  during  the  second  phase,  it  will 
extend  1  year  beyond  the  end  of  the  phase  two.21 

PEP  will  be  funded  by  members  on  the  basis  of  their  participation 
and  by  the  individual  efforts  of  interested  members.  The  WMO  budget 
will  fund  only  the  costs  related  to  international  coordination  and  guid- 
ance and  not  the  experiment  itself  or  its  evaluation.  The  main  role  of 
the  WMO  is  to  encourage  members  in  the  cooperative  effort,  to  safe- 
guard the  scientific  integrity  of  the  program,  to  insure  that  it  is  con- 
ducted in  the  best  possible  way,  and  to  disseminate  the  results  to  inter- 
ested members.  WMO  will  support  three  separate  groups  responsible 
for  the  international  coordination  and  guidance  aspects  of  the  experi- 
ment as  follows : 

(a)  The  Precipitation  Enhancement  Project  Board  should  be 
an  intergovernmental  Board  consisting  of  representatives  of  mem- 
bers making  the  major  contributions  to  the  project  and  to  which 
observers  from  interested  UN  organizations  and  ICSU  should  be 
invited.  The  Board  will  represent  the  main  management  body; 
proposing  plans  of  action  to  the  Executive  Committee  within  the 
limits  of  available  financial  resources; 

(b)  The  Executive  Committee  Panel  on  Weather  Modification 
with  supplementary  expertise  as  necessary  will  provide  the  Execu- 
tive Committee  and  the  Secretary-General  with  advice  on  details 
of  the  objectives  of  PEP  and  how  these  could  be  achieved  in 
principle.  It  should  guide  the  preparation  of  the  plans  to  be  re- 
viewed by  the  Board ;  and 

(c)  The  Scientific  Planning  Group  at  WMO  headquarters  will 
work  on  PEP  as  a  part  of  the  WMO  Research  and  Development 
Programs,  using  the  available  experience  and  support  of  the 


20  Ibid.,  p.  2. 

21  Ibid.,  p.  3. 


436 


Secretariat.  The  detailed  functions  of  the  Scientific  Planning 
Group  should  decide  upon  the  relationships  between  the  Scientific 
Planning  Group,  the  PEP  Board,  and  the  Executive  Committee 
Panel  on  Weather  Modification.22 

OTHER  WMO  ACTIVITIES  IN  "WEATHER  MODIFICATION" 

Other  WMO  activities  have  paralleled  U.S.  domestic  activities  in 
weather  modification.  These  have  included  conferences  of  experts, 
registration  of  weather  modification  activities  of  member  nations,  and 
the  problems  of  liability  for  potential  damage  caused  by  weather  modi- 
fication activities. 

Registration  and  reporting  of  tveather  modification  projects 

One  important  effort  of  the  WMO  has  been  in  the  area  of  registration 
of  weather  modification  projects.  Beginning  in  1973,  the  WMO  began 
sending  questionnaires  to  member  nations  asking  them  to  report  on 
their  weather  modification  activities.  While  compliance  with  this  re- 
quest was  completely  voluntary,  well  over  half  of  the  members  did 
report  on  their  activities.  In  1975,  as  part  of  the  weather  modification 
program  adopted  by  the  WMO  Congress,  the  WMO  Secretary  General 
was  required  to  maintain  a  register  of  experiments  and  operations  in 
the  weather  modification  field  carried  out  within  member  countries. 
Out  of  a  total  1975  membership  of  138,  74  nations  replied  and  16 
reported  weather  modification  activities.  Parts  of  the  most  recent  re- 
port, covering  activities  for  calendar  year  1976,  are  included  and 
discussed  in  the  chapter  on  foreign  activities.  (See  chapter  9.) 

WMO  conferences  on  weather  modification 

The  WMO  has  sponsored  two  conferences  on  weather  modification. 
These  were  preceded  by  another  international  conference,  which  was 
sponsored  jointly  by  the  Australian  Academy  of  Science  and  the 
American  Meteorological  Society  and  was  held  in  Canberra,  Australia, 
from  September  6  through  11,  1971.  The  first  WMO  international 
conference  on  weather  modification,  sponsored  jointly  with  the  Inter- 
national Association  of  Meteorology  and  Atmospheric  Phvsics,  was 
held  in  Tashkent,  U.S.S.R.,  on  October  1  through  7,  1973."  The  con- 
ference included  270  participants  from  around  the  world,  both  from 
countries  with  active  weather  modification  programs  and  from  those 
only  interested  in  the  subject.  The  conference  covered  fog  dispersal, 
rain  and  snow  enhancement,  hail  suppression,  modification  of  tropical 
storms  and  thunderstorms,  technical  and  operational  aspects  of  weath- 
er modification,  physical,  statistical  and  economic  evaluations  of 
weather  modification  and  ice  nucleus  technology.23  A  second  conference, 
sponsored  by  WMO  with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Ad- 
ministration, the  International  Association  of  Meteorology  and  At- 
mospheric Physics,  the  American  Meteorological  Society  and  the 


22  List.  Roland,  "Objectives  and  Status  of  the  WMO  Precipitation  Enhancement  Project 
(PEP)."  Department  of  Physics,  University  of  Toronto,  Toronto,  Ontario,  Canada,  p.  6, 
(Unpublished  paper  provided  bv  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.) 

m  The  proceedings  of  this  meeting  were  published  by  the  WMO  in  1974,  WMO  publication 
No.  399,  Geneva,  Switzerland. 


437 


Australian  Academy  of  Sciences  was  held  in  Boulder,  Colo.,  from 
August  2  through  6,  1976.24 

Typhoon  and  serious  storm  modification 

Another  area  of  weather  modification  activity,  typhoon  and  serious 
storm  modification,  has  also  been  an  area  of  concern  to  the  WMO.  Sev- 
eral efforts  at  learning  about  and  controlling  typhoons  or  tropical  cy- 
clones have  been  jointly  sponsored  by  the  WMO.  Together  with  the 
Economic  Commission  for  Asia  and  the  Far  East  of  the  United  Na- 
tions (now  the  Economic  and  Social  Commission  for  Asia  and  the 
Pacific),  the  WMO  has  established  a  Typhoon  Committee  which  con- 
centrates on  improving  civil  preparedness  against  typhoon  damage. 
Because  so  little  is  understood  about  typhoons,  most  of  the  activities 
undertaken  have  been  research  and  the  collection  and  analysis  of 
meteorological  information  about  tropical  weather. 

A  WMO  sponsored  Technical  Conference  on  Typhoon  Modification, 
which  was  held  in  Manila  in  October  of  1974,  endorsed  a  24-hour  limit 
on  typhoon  modification  experiments,  which  would  permit  experi- 
mental seeding  of  typhoons  if  they  were  not  expected  to  reach  land 
within  24  hours.23  A  1972  resolution  of  the  UN  General  Assembly 
praised  the  efforts  of  the  WMO  in  this  area  and  requested  the  WMO  to 
keep  the  UN  informed  of  progress  in  its  tropical  cyclone  project.26 

Global  Atmospheric  Research  Programme 

,  An  important  project  sponsored  jointly  by  WMO  and  the  Interna- 
tional Council  of  Scientific  Unions  is  known  by  the  acronym  GARP 
for  Global  Atmospheric  Research  Programme.  This  is  an  information 
gathering  and  research  project,  rather  than  a  weather  modification 
project  per  se.  The  data  from  GARP  is  expected  to  contribute  to  the 
development  of  long-range  weather  prediction  and  the  development 
of  large  scale  weather  modification  theories.  Hopefully,  successful  new 
methods  of  weather  forecasting  will  emerge  from  this  program  and 
the  new  information  can  be  used  to  carry  out  computer  simulations  of 
weather  modification  activities  on  a  global  scale.  GARP  is  expected  to 
complement  the  worldwide  measurement  of  atmospheric  particulates 
and  gases  to  be  undertaken  as  part  of  the  Earthwatch  Program  of  the 
U.X.  Environment  Program  established  by  the  Stockholm  conference. 

Legal  aspects  of  weather  modification 

The  WMO  and  the  United  Nations  Environment  Program  jointly 
sponsored  an  informal  meeting  on  the  legal  aspects  of  weather  modifi- 
cation in  Geneva,  Switzerland  during  November  17  to  21,  1975.  This 
meeting  had  a  double  purpose.  First,  the  group  was  asked  to  consider 
the  formulation  of  legal  principles  for  weather  modification,  bearing 
in  mind  the  principles  adopted  at  Stockholm  in  1972.  (See  the  fol- 
lowing section  on  United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human  Environ- 
ment.) Second,  the  group  was  asked  to  give  particular  consideration  to 
legal  liability  of  the  WMO  regarding  the  precipitation  enhancement 
program,  then  in  the  early  planning  stages.  The  principles  considered 
but  not  adopted  are  contained  in  the  mimeographed  report  of  the 
meeting,  pages  5  through  8,  which  is  reproduced  as  appendix  Q. 

24  The  WMO  publication  on  this  conference  was  entitled.  "Papers  Presented  at  the  Second 
WMO  Scientific  Conference  on  Weather  Modification,"  WMO-No.  443,  Geneva,  Switzerland, 
1976. 

23  WMO  Technical  Conference  on  Typhoon  Modification.  Manila,  Oct.  15-18,  1974,  state- 
ment on  typhoon  moderation,  mimeographed  WMO  document. 

26  United  Nations  document  No.  A/Res/2914  (XXVIII)  Nov.  13,  1972. 


438 


United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human  Environment 

The'  United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human  Environment,  held  in 
Stockholm,  Sweden,  from  June  5  through  16, 1972,  has  been  the  pivotal 
point  in  much  recent  international  environmental  activity,  and  it  has 
also  been  an  important  catalyst  in  international  activities  relating  to 
weather  modification.  Conferences  held  in  preparation  for  the  Stock- 
holm Conference  and  programs  initiated  by  it  are  the  major  coopera- 
tive weather  modification  activities  of  the  19T07s,  and  it  is  the  interna- 
tionally agreed  upon  principles  adopted  at  Stockholm  which  are  being 
considered  in  the  development  of  international  legal  principles  apply- 
ing to  cooperative  weather  modification  activities.  Many  of  these  activi- 
ties are  discussed  in  other  sections.  The  Conference  adopted  an  "Action 
Plan  for  the  Human  Environment"  based  on  a  "Declaration"  agreed  to 
by  the  participants. 

DECLARATION   OF   THE   UNITED   NATIONS   CONFERENCE   ON   THE  HUMAN 

ENVIRONMENT 

The  declaration  consists  of  a  preamble  and  26  principles  of  conduct 
intended  to  serve  as  guides  for  states  in  dealing  with  environmental 
problems  of  international  significance.  Principles  21  and  22  particu- 
larly ali'ect  weather  modification  activities.  Principle  21  deals  with 
state  responsibility  for  damage  to  the  environment  of  other  nations, 
and  principle  22  calls  on  states  to  cooperate  in  developing  international 
law  regarding  liability  and  compensation  for  such  damage.  The  two 
principles  are : 

"Principle  21 

"States  have,  in  accordance  with  the  Charter  of  the  United  Nations 
and  the  principle  of  international  law,  the  sovereign  right  to  exploit 
their  own  resources  pursuant  to  their  own  environmental  policies,  and 
the  responsibility  to  insure  that  activities  within  their  jurisdiction 
or  control  do  not  cause  damage  to  the  environment  of  other  states  or 
of  areas  beyond  the  limits  of  national  jurisdiction. 

"Principle  22 

"States  shall  cooperate  to  develop  further  the  international  law  re- 
garding liability  and  compensation  for  the  victims  of  pollution  and 
other  environmental  damage  caused  by  activities  within  the  jurisdic- 
tion or  control  of  such  states  to  areas  beyond  their  jurisdiction."  -T 

ACTION  PLAN  FOR  THE  HUMAN  ENVIRONMENT 

The  action  plan  consists  of  some  200  recommendations  for  national 
and  international  action — a  framework  for  future  environmental 
agreements.  Although  much  of  the  action  plan  relates  to  weather  more 
generally  and  pollution  of  the  air  and  water,  one  recommendation  in 


27  U.S.  Congress,  Senate.  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  "United  Nations  Conference  on 
the  Human  Environment,"  report  to  the  Senate  by  Senators  Claiborne  Pell  and  Clifford 
Case,  members  of  the  delegation  to  the  United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human  Environ- 
ment. October  1972.  92d  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  committee  print,  Washington,  U.S.  Government 
Printing  Office,  1972,  p.  18. 


439 


particular  applies  to  climate  modification.  Recommendation  70  reads 
as  follows : 

It  is  recommended  that  Governments  be  especially  mindful  of  activities  in 
which  there  is  an  appreciable  risk  of  effect  on  climate ;  and 

(a)  Carefully  evaluate  the  likelihood  and  magnitude  of  climatic  effects  and, 
to  the  maximum  extent  feasible,  disseminate  their  findings  before  embarking 
on  such  activities ; 

(b)  Consult  fully  other  interested  states  when  activities  carrying  a  risk  of 
such  effects  are  being  contemplated  or  implemented.28 

In  discussing  this  provision,  Senators  Claiborne  Pell  and  Clifford 
Case,  members  of  the  U.S.  delegation  to  the  Conference,  criticized 
what  they  saw  as  an  amendment  which  "considerably  weakened''  the 
provision.  This  amendment,  introduced  by  the  United  States  and 
adopted  by  the  Conference,  added  the  phrase  "to  the  maximum  extent 
feasible"  to  section  (a)  as  printed  above.  Concerning  this  amendment, 
the  Senators'  report  states : 

The  U.S.  amendment  appears  to  provide  a  loophole  whereby  any  country  could 
conduct  covert  military  weather  modification  operations  without  any  form  of 
international  control  or  responsibility.  This,  we  feel,  is  contrary  to  a  resolution 
which  we  and  14  other  Senators  have  introduced  in  the  Senate  which  expresses 
the  sense  of  the  Senate  that  the  U.S.  should  seek  the  agreement  of  other  govern- 
ments to  a  proposed  treaty  prohibiting  the  use  of  any  environmental  modification 
activity  as  a  weapon  of  war.  We  adamantly  oppose  the  use  of  environmental  tech- 
niques as  weapons  of  war  and  strongly  urge  the  Administration  to  actively  pro- 
mote the  negotiation  and  ratification  of  such  a  treaty.29 

The  resolution  referred  to  in  the  above  quotation,  and  the  discussion 
surrounding  its  passage,  are  discussed  in  the  section  on  congressional 
activities. 

EARTH  WATCH  PROGRAM 

The  major  project  developing  from  the  Stockholm  Conference  in 
the  area  of  atmospheric  changes  is  the  Earthwatch  program.  While  the 
program  as  a  whole  is  designed  to  assess  global  environmental  condi- 
tions in  all  areas  from  water  pollution  to  food  contamination,  one  of  its 
first  projects  will  be  to  measure  pollution  levels  around  the  world  and 
study  their  effects  on  climate  *  *  *  the  inadvertent  modification  of 
weather.  The  Earthwatch  program  which  will  be  set  up  under  the 
auspices  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization,  will  consist  of  the 
following  major  elements : 

Ten  baseline  stations  to  measure  the  long  term  global  trends  which 
may  ultimately  cause  climate  changes.  These  stations  would  be  estab- 
lished in  remote  areas  far  from  any  sources  of  pollution. 

One  hundred  additional  stations  to  monitor  the  air  quality  on  a 
regional  basis.  This  monitoring  will  be  coordinated  by  the  WMO. 

Establishment  of  water  borne  stations  to  measure  containments  in 
major  rivers,  lakes,  and  seas. 

Establishment  of  research  centers  and  biological  centers  to  analyze 
changes  in  soil  conditions  and  plant  and  animal  life. 

STUDY  OF  MAX'S  IMPACT  OX  CLIMATE 

Of  the  many  conferences  and  preparatory  meetings  held  prior  to  the 
Stockholm  Conference,  one  in  particular  is  noteworthy.  In  1970,  sup- 

28  Ibid.,  p.  36. 
» Ibid.,  p.  5. 


440 


ported  by  the  U.N.  Secretariat  and  the  World  Meteorological  Organi- 
zation,'30  scientists  from  14  countries  participated  in  the  Study  of 
Man's  Impact  on  Climate  (SMIC),  sponsored  by  the  Massachusetts 
Institute  of  Technology  and  hosted  in  Sweden  by  the  Eoyal  Swedish 
Academy  of  Sciences  and  the  Eoyal  Swedish  Academy  of  Engineering 
Sciences.30  The  purpose  of  the  study  was  to  provide  an  authoritative 
assessment  of  the  state  of  scientific  understanding  of  the  possible  im- 
pacts of  man's  activities  on  the  regional  and  global  climate.  Based  on 
this  assessment,  specific  recommendations  were  developed  for  programs 
that  would  provide  the  knowledge  necessary  for  more  definitive  an- 
swers in  these  complex  areas.  Many  of  these  recommendations  were 
incorporated  into  the  Action  Plan  for  the  Human  Environment.  One 
in  particular  bears  mentioning  separately.  This  suggested  "that  an 
international  agreement  be  sought  to  prevent  large-scale  (directly 
affecting  over  1  million  square  kilometers)  experiments  in  persistent  or 
long  term  climate  modification  until  the  scientific  community  reaches 
a  consensus  on  the  consequences  of  the  modification.31 

Other  International.  Activities 

united  states/canadian  agreement 

The  Agreement  between  the  United  States  of  America  and  Canada 
Relating  to  the  Exchange  of  Information  on  Weather  Modification 
Activities  was  signed  and  entered  into  force  on  March  26,  1975.32  The 
agreement  provides  that  the  United  States  and  Canada  will  exchange 
information  on  weather  modification  activities  occurring  within  200 
miles  of  their  common  border  or  wherever  else  they  may  occur  if  it  is  ex- 
pected that  the  activities  will  affect  the  "composition,  behavior,  or 
dynamics  of  the  atmosphere  over  the  territory  of  the  other  Party." 
When  possible,  this  information  will  be  transmitted  to  the  other  party 
prior  to  the  beginning  of  the  activities. 

NORTH  AMERICAN  INTERSTATE  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  COUNCIL 33 

The  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council 
(XAIWMC)  was  organized  on  January  17,  1975,  by  representatives 
of  the  governments  of  several  U.S.  States  and  Canadian  provinces  and 
the  Mexican  Government.  Its  purpose  is  to  coordinate  and  serve  as  a 
focal  point  for  intrastate,  interstate,  and  international  weather  modi- 
fication activities.  This  would  include  research  into  weather  modifica- 
tion, legislation  and  treaties  governing  weather  modification  activities, 
and  public  information  activities  as  well  as  its  coordination  functions. 
Membership  is  open  to  any  state  or  province  of  the  United  States, 
Canada,  and  Mexico. 

Affiliate  membership  is  available  to  national  agencies,  political  sub- 
groups within  the  States,  professional  organizations  and  scientific 


w  "Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  Climate,"  Stockholm,  1970,  inadvertent  climate  modifica- 
tion ;  report,  Cambridge,  Mass.,  MIT  Tress,  1971. 
a1  Ibid.,  p.  19. 

32  20  UST  54  ;  TIAS  8056,  reproduced  in  app.  F. 

33  Tills  information  is  taken  from  a  document  entitled  :  "Weather  Modification.  North 
American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council.  'Its  purpose  and  activities'."  Office  of 
the  NAIWMC,  Executive  Secretary,  Box  3CE,  NMSU,  Las  Cruces,  N.  Mex.,  88003  Septem- 
ber 1970,  publication  No.  76-2. 


441 


societies.  Current  membership  of  NAIWMC  consists  of  15  members 
and  affiliates  in  all  three  countries.  In  its  brief  history,  NAIWMC 
has  taken  an  active  role  in  legislation  (including  testifying)  proposed 
at  both  the  State  and  Federal  level  concerning  weather  modification. 
Additionally,  NAIWMC  has  supported  directly  or  indirectly  five  in- 
terstate conferences  on  weather  modification  and  made  the  proceedings 
of  the  conferences  available  to  the  public.34 

Congressional  Activities 

Although  congressional  interest  in  domestic  weather  modification 
activities  has  grown  steadily  for  many  years,  interest  in  the  interna- 
tional aspects  is  more  recent.  With  the  exception  of  one  resolution  dis- 
cussed in  the  following  section,  all  such  activities  in  the  Congress  have 
taken  place  since  1970. 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION  AS  A  WEAPON  OF  WAR 

Senate  Resolution  71,  prohibiting  environmental  modification  as  a 
weapon  of  war 

In  December  1971,  Senator  Claiborne  Pell  inserted  a  statement  in 
the  Congressional  Record  indicating  his  concern  over  the  possible  use 
by  the  United  States  of  precipitation  enhancement  (rainmaking)  in 
Southeast  Asia  and  the  future  use  of  these  and  other  weather  modifi- 
cation techniques  in  warfare.  He  expressed  concern  that  such  activities 
carried  on  by  any  countries  for  other  than  peaceful  purposes  might 
endanger  international  cooperation  in  peaceful  weather  collection 
and  modification  activities.  The  Senator  urged  that  the  United  States, 
through  the  President,  renounce  the  use  of  geophysical  and  environ- 
mental research  for  other  than  peaceful  purposes  and  take  the  initia- 
tive in  framing  and  introducing  a  treaty  imposing  a  prohibition  on 
all  forms  of  geophysical  and  environmental  warfare.  Senator  Pell 
said  he  would  introduce  a  resolution  setting  forth  a  draft  treaty  on 
weather  modification  in  order  to  generate  discussion  and  action  in 
this  area. 

At  the  time  of  Senator  Pell's  statement,  the  Department  of  Defense 
had  completed  several  precipitation  enhancement  projects  for  Govern- 
ment agencies  both  in  the  United  States  and  abroad. 

Several  news  columnists  had  claimed  that  precipitation  enhance- 
ment had  been  used  in  Vietnam  in  articles  appearing  early  in  1971, 
and  these  operations  were  later  mentioned  in  the  Pentagon  papers, 
which  were  released  in  June  1971.  On  January  26,  1972,  Senator  Pell 
inserted  in  the  Congressional  Record  his  correspondence  with  the  De- 
partment of  Defense  in  attempting  to  confirm  or  deny  the  newsmen's 
allegations.35  After  several  months  of  correspondence,  the  Defense 
Department  declined  to  answer  the  questions  publicly  on  the  basis 
that  such  a  reply  would  threaten  the  national  security.  Senator  Alan 
Cranston  and  Congressman  Gilbert  Gude  received  the  same  response 
to  their  inquiries.  During  an  April  1972  appearance  before  the  Senate 


34  See  ch.  7,  p.  333,  for  references  to  the  five  meetings  and  other  activities  of  the  North 
American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council. 

35  Congressional  Record  (daily  edition)  Jan.  20,  1972  :  S  507-508. 


442 


Foreign  Relations  Committee,  Secretary  of  Defense  Laird  was  ques- 
tioned by  both  Senator  Pell  and  Senator  Fulbright  about  rainmaking 
in  Vietnam.  The  Secretary  said :  "We  have  never  engaged  in  that  type 
of  activity  over  Xorth  Vietnam." 36 

On  March  17,  1972,  Senator  Pell  and  15  cosponsors  introduced  S. 
Res.  281,  stating  the  sense  of  the  Senate  that  the  U.S.  Government 
should  seek  agreement  with  other  governments  to  a  treaty  calling  for 
the  complete  cessation  of  any  research,  experimentation,  and  use  of 
environmental  or  geophysical  modification  activity  as  a  weapon  of 
war.  Hearings  were  held  on  S.  Res.  281  on  July  26  and  27,  1972.37  At 
the  time  the  Department  of  State  indicated  that  they  were  not  in 
favor  of  passage  of  the  resolution  and  proposed  treaty.  The  State 
Department  spokesman  stated : 

*  *  *  we  believe  that  there  is  at  present  too  much  uncertainty  about  essential 
facts  and  that  the  factual  basis  itself  is  insufficient  to  make  possible  any  funda- 
mental decisions  on  whether  a  treaty  dealing  with  military  aspects  is  feasible 
and  desirable. 

It  is  therefore  our  conclusion  that  actions  such  as  those  recommended  in  S.  Res. 
281  are  premature.  Accordingly,  the  Department  of  State  recommends  that  this 
resolution  not  be  adopted.38 

Several  other  witnesses  made  comments  on  the  proposed  treaty,  as 
well  as  commenting  on  the  need  for  a  treaty.  Several  resolutions  on  the 
subject  of  a  treaty  were  offered  in  the  House  of  Representatives  during 
1972.  but  no  final  action  was  taken  in  either  the  House  or  Senate  during 
the  92d  Congress.  S.  Res.  281  was  endorsed  unanimously  by  the  NATO 
North  Atlantic  Assembly  on  November  21,  1972,  indicating  a  broad 
international  interest  in  the  subject  of  an  international  weather  modifi- 
cation treaty.39 

On  February  22, 1973,  Senator  Pell  introduced  S.  Res.  71  for  himself 
and  18  cosponsors.  This  resolution  was  identical  to  S.  Res.  281,  and  after 
consideration  by  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee,  was  recommended 
favorably  to  the  Senate  on  June  27,  1973  with  three  amendments.  The 
amendments  indicated  that  the  committee  felt  the  United  States  should 
seek  a  multilateral  treaty,  including  all  the  permanent  members  of  the 
United  Nations  Security  Council,  that  the  treaty  contained  in  the  reso- 
lution was  only  a  model,  and  that  the  resolution  in  no  way  intended  to 
impede  or  restrict  research  or  experimentation  on  use  of  environmental 
modification  techniques  for  peaceful  purposes.  S.  Res.  71  was  approved 
by  the  Senate  by  a  vote  of  82  to  10  on  July  11, 1973.40 

Conoressional  activities  related  to  hostile  use  of  weather  modification, 
1974-76 

Tn  January  and  March  1974,  Senator  Pell's  Subcommittee  on  Oceans 
and  International  Environment  of  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Com- 
mittee held  more  hearings  "concerning  the  need  for  an  international 

3«  Shapley,  Deborah,  "Rainmaking  :  Rumored  Use  Over  Laos  Alarms  Arms  Experts.  Scien- 
tists." Science.  .Tune  16.  1972,  as  reproduced  in  Congressional  Record  (daily  edition) 
Juno  IF,.  1972  :  S  9555-9556. 

T'.S.  Congress.  Senate,  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  Subcommittee  on  Oceans 
and  International  Environment,  "Prohibiting  Militarv  Weather  Modification."  hearings  on 
S.  Ros.  281.  92d  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  July  26  and  27,  1972,  Washington.  U.S.  Government  Print- 
ing Office.  1972,  162  pp. 

38  Ibid.,  p.  20. 

"M  S  Congress,  Senate.  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  "Eighteenth  meeting  of  the 
Atlnntic  Assembly,"  report  of  the  U.S.  delegation,  committee  print,  93d  Cong.,  1st  sess., 
May  11.  1973. 

4"  s.  Res.  71  reproduced  in  app.  R. 


443 


agreement  prohibiting  the  use  of  environmental  modification  and  geo- 
physical modification  as  weapons  of  war."  41  At  the  time  Senator  Pell 
noted  that  since  the  administration  had  made  no  move  in  6  months, 
the  hearing  was  being  held  to  shed  light  on  the  reasons  for  the  delay. 
Dining  the  hearing  the  State  Department  spokesman  stated : 

*  *  *  the  Secretary  (of  State)  expressed  regret  that  it  was  not  yet  possible  to 
provide  a  coordinated  executive  branch  response  on  S.  Res.  71.  He  assured  you 
that  the  matter  would  be  looked  into  closely  to  determine  how  the  executive  branch 
misht  be  responsive  to  the  resolution's  recommendations. 

In  this  regard  the  President  has  directed  that  a  study  of  the  military  aspects 
of  weather  and  other  environmental  modification  techniques  be  undertaken.  Fur- 
ther *teps  will  be  determined  subsequent  to  the  findings  of  this  study  and  the  re- 
view of  those  findings.42 

At  the  classified  March  briefing  (later  declassified  and  printed  with 
the  above  hearing)  the  Department  of  Defense  outlined  the  precipita- 
tion enhancement  project  which  took  place  over  Laos,  North  Vietnam, 
and  South  Vietnam  between  1967  and  1972.  According  to  both  the  De- 
partment of  Defense  spokesman  and  the  Senators  present  at  the  hear- 
ing, the  program  was  very  modest,  its  success  was  questionable,  and 
because  of  this  questionable  success,  the  environmental  impact  was 
most  likely  negligible. 

During  1974  and  1975,  the  House  International  Relations  Committee 
considered  several  resolutions  calling  for  an  international  agreement 
prohibiting  the  use  of  weather  modification  as  a  weapon  of  war.  None 
of  the  resolutions  passed,  but  hearings  were  held  during  both  1974 
and  1975.43 

.  On  January  21,  1976,  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Committee,  Sub- 
committee on  Oceans  and  International  Environment,  held  a  hearing 
which  concentrated  on  executive  branch  comments  on  the  Draft  Con- 
vention on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use  of 
Environmental  Modification  Techniques  which  was  then  being  con- 
sided  by  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarmament.44 

OTHER  CONGRESSIONAL  ACTIONS  RELATING  TO  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

Senate  Concurrent  Resolution  67 — U.S.  Participation  in  the  World 
Weather  Program 
Senate  Concurrent  Resolution  67,  which  passed  the  Senate,  as  amend- 
ed by  the  House,  on  May  29, 1968,  made  it  the  sense  of  the  Congress  that 
the  United  States  should  participate  in,  and  give  full  support  to,  the 
world  weather  program  then  being  developed  under  the  auspices  of  the 
United  Nations.  This  weather  program  included  the  World  Weather 
Watch,  an  international  system  for  the  observation  of  the  global  atmos- 

'■  41  U.S.  Congress.  Senate.  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and 
International  Environment.  "Weather  Modification"  hearings  :  93d  Cong..  2d  sess.,  Jan.  25 
and  Mar.  20.  1974.  (Top  secret  hearing  held  on  Mar.  20.  1974;  made  public  on  May  19, 
1974)  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Printing  Ofiice,  1974  ;  123  pp. 

<     42  Ibid.,  p.  9. 

,  43  U.S.  Congress.  House.  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs.  Subcommittee  on  International 
Organizations  and  Movements.  "Weather  Modification  as  a  Weapon  of  War."  hearing,  93d 

'Cong..  2d  sess..  Sept.  24.  1974.  Washington.  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.  1974;  39 
pp.  Committee  on  International  Relations.  "Prohibition  of  Weather  Modification  as  a 
Weapon  of  War."  hearing.  94th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  Julv  29,  1975.  Washington,  U.S.  Govern- 
ment Printing  Office.  1975.  51  pp. 

1     44  U.S.  Congress.  Senate.  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and 
■  International  Environment.  "Prohibiting  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification  Tech- 
niques." hearing.  94th  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  Jan.  21,  1976,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Print- 
ing  Office,  1976,  46  pp. 


444 


phere  and  more  rapid  and  accurate  processing  of  weather  data.  A 
second  part  of  the  world  weather  program  was  to  be  the  conduct  of  a 
comprehensive  program  of  research  for  the  development  of  a  capability 
in  long-range  weather  prediction,  and  for  the  "theoretical  study  and 
evaluation  of  inadvertent  climate  modification  and  the  feasibility  of 
international  climate  modification."  45 

National  Weather  Modification  Act  of  1976 46 

The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of  1976  (Public  Law 
94-490,  Oct.  13,  1976)  stated  as  its  purpose  to  "develop  a  comprehen- 
sive and  coordinated  national  weather  modification  policy  and  a  na- 
tional program  of  weather  modification  research  and  development." 
This  would  include  the  development  of  "both  national  and  interna- 
tional mechanisms  designed  to  minimize  conflicts  which  may  rise  with 
respect  to  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modification."  The  law  called 
for  a  study  which  shall  include  "a  review  of  the  international  impor- 
tance and  implications  of  weather  modification  activities  by  the  United 
States,"  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  necessity  and  feasibility  of  nego- 
tiating an  international  agreement  concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of 
weather  modification,  and  "formation  of  one  or  more  options  for  a 
model  international  agreement  concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather 
modification  and  the  regulation  of  national  weather  modification." 
Finally,  the  law  required  that  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  report  to 
the  Congress  within  1  year  on,  among  other  things,  the  international 
agreement  specified  above. 

In  response  to  this  directive  from  the  Congress,  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  established  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board 
which  has  recently  begun  holding  meetings  to  develop  this  national 
policy  and  provide  the  Secretary  with  information  necessary  to  make 
the  report  to  Congress.47 

Senate  Resolution  J$ 

Another  piece  of  legislation,  Senate  Kesolution  49,  was  introduced 
by  Senator  Pell  on  January  24,  1977.  This  resolution,  which  was  also 
introduced  during  1976,  calls  upon  the  President  to  initiate  negotia- 
tion of  a  treaty  requiring  the  preparation  of  an  environmental  impact 
statement  for  any  activity  which  may  reasonably  be  expected  to  have 
a  significant  effect  on  the  environment  of  other  nations  or  a  global 
common  area.  Senator  Pell  held  that  a  treaty  of  this  sort  would  insure 
that  environmental  modification  activities  could  not  be  carried  out 
without  considering  the  consequences  of  such  activity  beyond  a  na- 
tion's own  territory.  A  hearing  was  held  on  this  resolution  by  the  Sen- 
ate Foreign  Relations  Committee  on  March  31,  1977,  and  again  on 
May  18, 1978. 

U.S.  Foreign  Policy 

Congress  has  shown  a  growing  interest  in  the  development  of  a 
U.S.  policy  toward  international  weather  modification  activities. 
However,  the  executive  branch  has  seemed  reluctant  to  develop  such 


48  Congressional  Record  (bound  ed.)  vol.  114,  part  7,  Apr.  1,  1968,  p.  8419. 

46  Text  included  in  app.  I. 

47  See  ch.  5  for  discussion  of  the  activities  of  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board. 


445 


a  policy,  preferring  to  await  further  developments  in  weather  modifi- 
cation technology.  The  National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of 
1976  (discussed  in  a  previous  section)  requires  that  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  suggest  a  national  policy  including  both  domestic  and  in- 
ternational aspects  of  weather  modification.  In  pursuance  of  this  leg- 
islation, the  Secretary  of  Commerce  established  the  Weather  Modi- 
fication Advisory  Board  under  the  chairmanship  of  Harlan  Cleveland 
to  assist  her  in  developing  such  a  policy.  The  report  of  this  Board 
is  expected  to  be  submitted  to  the  Secretary  for  her  approval  and  sub- 
sequent transmittal  to  the  President  and  the  Congress  during  1973. 4S 

VARIOUS  EXECUTIVE  BRANCH  PROPOSALS 

Despite  executive  branch  reluctance  to  develop  a  comprehensive 
policy  in  dealing  with  weather  modification,  including  its  interna- 
tional aspects,  many  statements  have  been  made  by  various  executive 
branch  spokesmen  on  the  subject  and  many  studies  encouraging  the 
United  States  to  develop  such  a  policy  have  been  made.  As  early  as 
1961,  President  John  F.  Kennedy  proposed  before  the  United  Nations 
further  cooperative  efforts  between  all  nations  in  weather  prediction 
and  control,  and  U.S.  financial  support  for  international  weather  ac- 
tivities has  been  substantial.  In  the  intervening  years,  additional 
statements  have  been  made.  These  have  generally  been  of  a  cautious 
nature,  expressing  hope  that  the  technology  can  be  used  to  help  man- 
kind, but  fearful  of  its  consequences  if  used  foolishly  or  with  mali- 
cious intent.  On  January  26,  1971,  Secretary  of  State  William  P. 
Eogers  stated  the  common  theme : 

We  are  anxious  to  apply  weather  modification  technology,  as  it  becomes  op- 
erational, to  the  problems  of  developing  countries.  We  are  also  alert  to  the  need 
to  consider  international  arrangements  to  deal  with  the  implications  of  this  new 
phenomenon.*9 

During  the  same  year,  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  an  orga- 
nization of  distinguished  scientists  and  engineers  which  has  a  long  and 
close  relationship  with  the  U.S.  Government,  prepared  a  study  of  the 
future  of  the  atmospheric  sciences  which  made  the  following  recom- 
mendations to  the  United  States : 

The  U.S.  Government  is  urged  to  present  for  adoption  by  the  United  Nations 
General  Assembly  a  resolution  dedicating  all  weather  modification  efforts  to 
peaceful  purposes  and  establishing,  preferably  within  the  framework  of  inter- 
national nongovernmental  scientific  organizations,  an  advisory  mechanism  for 
consideration  of  weather  modification  problems  of  potential  international  con- 
cern before  they  reach  critical  levels.50 

Again  in  1972,  in  a  program  proposed  by  its  review  panel  on  weather 
and  climate  modification,  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences  recom- 
mended efforts  to  develop  a  weather  modification  program  devoted  to 
peaceful  and  safe  international  uses  with  the  proposal  of  a  three-goal 
program  for  U.S.  activities.  The  goals  outlined  by  the  panel  were: 

Completion  by  1980  of  research  to  put  precipitation  control  on  a 
sound  basis ; 

48  See  discussion  of  activities  of  the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  in  ch.  5,  p.  — . 

49  Department  of  State  Bulletin,  vol.  LXIV,  No.  1651.  Feb.  15.  1971,  p.  198. 

60  U.S.  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences,  "The  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences  and  Man's  Needs,"  report,  1971,  p.  56. 


34-857—79  31 


446 


Development,  in  the  next  decade,  of  the  necessary  technology  to 
move  toward  mitigation  of  severe  storms ;  and 

Determination  by  1980  of  the  extent  of  inadvertent  modification 
both  of  local  weather  and  of  global  climate.51 

As  early  as  1965,  the  Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification 
of  the  National  Science  Foundation  (a  Federal  agency)  issued  a  report 
on  weather  and  climate  modification  which  included  the  following 
suggestions  for  the  national  policy  on  the  international  uses  of  weather 
modification : 

"The  Commission  believes  that : 

"1.  It  would  be  highly  desirable  for  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  in  connection  with  the  expansion  of  its  program  of  weather  and 
climate  modification,  to  issue  a  basic  statement  of  its  views  on  the  rela- 
tionship of  this  national  effort  to  the  interests,  hopes,  and  possible 
apprehensions  of  the  rest  of  the  world.  Early  enunciation  of  national 
policy  embodying  two  main  points  are  recommended : 

"(a)  That  it  is  the  purpose  of  the  United  States  *  *  *  to  pur- 
sue its  efforts  in  weather  and  climate  modification  for  peaceful 
ends  and  for  the  constructive  improvement  of  conditions  of  human 
life  throughout  the  world ;  and 

"(b)  That  the  United  States,  recognizing  the  interests  and  con- 
cerns of  other  countries,  welcomes  and  solicits  their  cooperation, 
directly  and  through  international  arrangements,  for  the  mutual 
achievement  of  human  well-being. 
"This  cooperation  should  cover  both  research  and  ultimately,  opera- 
tional programs  of  interest  to  other  countries.  It  should  be  concerned 
not  only  with  deliberate,  but  also  inadvertent  human  interventions  in 
the  atmosphere  that  affect  weather  and  climate.  Such  a  policy  declara- 
tion could  be  issued  by  the  President  or  appropriately  incorporated  in 
any  basic  legislation  on  the  subject  of  weather  modification  which  the 
Congress  may  enact. 

"2.  Steps  should  be  taken  by  the  United  States,  in  concert  with  other 
nations,  to  explore  the  international  institutional  mechanisms  that 
may  be  appropriate  to  foster  international  cooperation  and  cope  with 
the  problems  which  may  be  anticipated  in  the  field  of  weather  and 
climate  modification. 

"3.  Attention  should  be  given  to  the  question  of  how  greater  empha- 
sis can  be  given  to  atmospheric  sciences  in  existing  bilateral  and 
multilateral  programs  of  education  and  technical  cooperation;  and  to 
what  additional  measures  may  be  needed  to  fill  this  deficiency. 

"4.  Encouragement  should  be  given  to  research  on  the  impact  of 
weather  modification  measures  in  foreign  countries.  The  need  has  been 
previously  discussed  for  greater  attention  to  the  biological,  economic 
and  social  aspects  of  weather  modification  in  the  United  States.  A 
different  set  of  problems  may  well  be  encountered  in  many  of  the 
developing  countries  where  the  natural  environment  and  patterns  of 
oronomic  and  social  life  present  contrasts  to  those  prevailing  in  this 
country.  A  greater  understanding  of  the  significance  of  these  differ- 
ences must  precede  any  attempt  to  evaluate  the  suitability  of  various 


"J  Sullivan,  Walter,  "Goals  for  U.S.  Urp;ed  on  Weather  Control,"  New  York  Times,  Dec.  29, 
1972;  p.  50. 


447 


weather  and  climate  modification  practices  for  specific  foreign  areas 
and  to  design  appropriate  programs  of  cooperation."  52 

NATIONAL  ADVISORY  COMMITTEE  OX  TIIE  OCEANS  AND  ATMOSPHERE 

Public  Law  92-125,  adopted  in  1971,  established  the  National  Advi- 
sory Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere  (NACOA).  One  purpose 
of  NACOA  is  to  "undertake  a  continuing  review  of  the  progress  of  the 
marine  atmospheric  science  and  service  programs  of  the  United 
States,"  53  and  the  committee  was  required  to  submit  an  annual  report 
to  the  President  and  the  Congress.  Among  the  recommendations  for 
action  in  its  first  annual  report  (1972)  were  the  following  which  con- 
cerned international  aspects  of  weather  modification : 

International :  International  agreement  should  be  arrived  at  and  the  necessary 
institutional  arrangements  developed  to  eschew  the  hostile  uses  of  weather  mod- 
ification and  to  investigate  changes  in  the  global  climate  *  *  *. 

NACOA  wishes  to  associate  itself  with  the  position  taken  by  the  Nation  Acad- 
emy of  Sciences  that,  in  order  to  safeguard  the  life-sustaining  properties  of  the 
atmosphere  for  the  common  benefit  of  mankind,  the  U.S.  Government  is  urged  Lo 
present  for  adoption  by  the  United  Nations  General  Assembly  a  resolution  dedi- 
cating all  weather  modification  efforts  to  peaceful  purposes  and  establishing, 
preferably  within  the  framework  of  international  nongovernmental  scientific 
organization,  an  advisory  mechanism  for  consideration  of  weather-modification 
problems  of  potential  international  concern  before  they  reach  critical  levels.54 

After  mentioning  the  subject  in  intervening  reports,  the  Fifth 
NACOA  Annual  Report  of  June  19T6  discussed  U.S.  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  in  detail.  A  1975  report  of  a  subcommittee  of  the  Domes- 
tic Council  was  cited  as  an  excellent  basis  for  U.S.  policy  regarding 
weather  modification  activities.55  Among  its  recommendations  for  do- 
mestic policy  changes,  the  subcommittee  also  discussed  the  importance 
of  assessing  the  potential  international  implications  of  weather  modifi- 
cation activities.  The  Federal  weather  modification  program  was  criti- 
cized for,  among  other  things,  its  fragmented  approach  to  the  prob- 
lems and  technological  developments  involved.  In  discussing  the 
United  States  effort  in  weather  modification,  NACOA  supported  this 
criticism  and  added  the  following  paragraph  dealing  with  the  interna- 
tional weather  modification  situation : 

An  important  element  in  the  weather  modification  picture  is  its  international 
aspect.  The  World  Meteorological  Organization  is  proceeding  with  its  own  plans 
for  an  international  weather  modification  research  program,  and  it  is  important 
that  the  United  States  be  prepared  to  participate.  There  are  also  international  as- 
pects to  the  pursuit  of  our  own  program  goals.  NOAA's  Stormfury  project,  which 
studies  the  effects  of  intervening  in  the  dynamics  of  tropical  convective  storms 
and  offers  hope  of  a  future  ability  to  modify  hurricanes,  was  to  be  moved  from 
the  Atlantic  to  the  western  Pacific  for  scienific  reasons.  Objections  on  the  part  of 
some  western  Pacific  nations  prevented  this  move  and  it  will  instead  be  conducted 
in  the  eastern  Pacific  and  western  Atlantic.  It  is  important  to  the  ultimate  success 
of  this  effort  that  we  recognize  that  other  nations  which  might  be  affected,  or 


52  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification."  report  of  the  Special  Commission  on  Weather 
Modification.  National  Science  Foundation.  1965,  pp.  27-29. 

53  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere.  "A  Report  to  the  President 
and  the  Congress, "  first  annual  report,  June  30,  1972,  Washington,  U.S.  Government  Print- 
in?  Office,  1972,  p.  43. 

M  Ibid.,  p.  21. 

55  "The  Federal  Role  in  Weather  Modification."  a  report  of  the  Subcommittee  on  Climate 
Change  of  the  Environmental  Resources  Committee,  Domestic  Council,  December  1975. 


448 


\Thich  believe  they  might  be,  have  a  legitimate  interest  in  understanding  its  ex- 
pected benefits,  the  risks  involved,  and  the  safeguards  proposed.56 

ACTIVITIES  IN   197  7 

The  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  established  under  the 
chairmanship  of  Harlan  Cleveland  to  assist  the  Secretary  of  Com- 
merce develop  a  national  policy  on  weather  modification,  has  held  sev- 
eral meetings  during  1977.  Its  final  report  to  the  Secretary  of  Com- 
merce is  expected  during  1978. 

In  a  reorganization  prompted  by  the  new  administration,  coordina- 
tion of  international  weather  modification  activities  has  been  placed 
under  the  Bureau  of  Oceans  and  International  Environmental  and  Sci- 
entific Affairs  in  the  Department  of  State.  The  Interagency  Study 
Group,  which  is  responsible  to  the  Bureau  of  Oceans  and  International 
Environmental  and  Scientific  Affairs,  has  as  its  function  dealing  with 
the  problems  of  international  relations  in  weather  modification  ex- 
perimentation by  the  United  States.  Thus  far  it  has  dealt  solely  with 
the  problems  involved  in  the  continuation  of  Project  Stormfury,  a 
project  concerned  with  tropical  storm  modification,  at  the  request  of 
NOAA.  In  addition  to  negotiating  with  other  countries,  primarily 
Mexico,  concerning  experimentation,  the  study  group  is  examining  the 
potential  problems  of  liability  of  the  United  States  for  damage  done 
by  official  U.S.  weather  modification  activities. 


56  National  Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere.  "A  Report  to  the  President 
and  the  Congress,"  fifth  annual  report,  June  30,  1976.  Washington.  U.S.  Government 
Printing  Office,  1976.  pp.  53-o4. 


CHAPTER  11 


LEGAL  ASPECTS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  Nancy  Lee  Jones,  Legislative  Attorney,  and  Daniel  Hill  Zafren,  Assistant 
Chief,  American  Law  Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Domestic* 

The  legal  issues  presented  by  weather  modification  are  complex  and 
unsettled.  These  issues  can  be  divided  generally  into  four  broad  cate- 
gories :  Private  rights  in  the  clouds,  liability  for  weather  modification, 
defenses  which  may  be  raised  against  such  liability,  and  methods  of 
controlling  weather  modification.  Before  a  discussion  of  these  issues 
is  begun,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  body  of  law  concerning  weather 
modification  is  slight  and  existing  case  law  offers  few  guidelines  for 
the  determination  of  these  issues.  For  this  reason  it  is  often  necessary 
to  attempt  to  analogize  the  issues  which  arise  concerning  weather  mod- 
ification to  other,  more  settled,  areas  of  law  such  as  the  general  law 
of  water  distribution. 

PRIVATE  RIGHTS  IN  THE  CLOUDS 

Several  different  issues  have  been  raised  concerning  private  rights 
in  the  clouds :  First,  are  there  any  private  rights  in  clouds  or  in  the  wa- 
ter which  may  flow  from  them ;  second,  does  a  landowner  have  any  par- 
ticular rights  in  atmospheric  water ;  and  third,  does  a  Aveather  modifier 
have  rights  in  atmospheric  water.  It  has  been  argued  that  there  are 
no  private  rights  in  the  clouds  or  their  water  since  they  are  common 
property  which  belongs  to  everyone  who  would  benefit  from  them. 
Analogies  have  been  drawn  to  animals  ferae  naturae.  As  one  commen- 
tator has  stated : 

Clouds,  and  therefore  the  ability  to  modify  weather,  differ  from  most  types  of 
property,  either  real  or  personal,  in  that  there  is  no  way  in  which  they  may  be 
captured  or  possessed.  Man  cannot  force  a  cloud  to  stay  over  his  property  or  keep 
it  from  passing  over  his  property.  In  this  respect  clouds  have  often  been  com- 
pared to  animals  ferae  naturae.  Animals  ferae  naturae  cannot  be  owned  because 
they  cannot  be  possessed.  Therefore  since  this  common  law  element  of  ownership 
cannot  be  met,  they  are  the  common  property  of  all,  not  the  individual  property 
of  any  one  person.  (Citations  omitted.)  1 

This  theory  of  common  ownership  of  the  clouds  and  any  water  they 
might  contain  has  also  found  support  in  one  of  the  few  cases  discussing 
weather  modification.  In  Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Association  v. 
Blue  Ridge  Weather  Modification  Association,  44  Pa.  D.  &  C.  2d  749 
(1968) ,  the  court  stated : 

We  are  of  the  opinion  that  clouds  and  the  moisture  in  the  clouds,  like  air 
and  sunshine,  are  part  of  space  and  are  common  property  belonging  to  everyone 

*  Nancy  Lee  Jones,  legislative  attorney,  American  Law  Division,  Congressional  Research 
Service. 

1  "Legal  Aspects  of  Weather  Modification  in  Texas,"  25  Baylor  L.  Rev.  501,  502  (1973). 

(449) 


450 


who  will  benefit  from  what  occurs  naturally  in  those  clouds.  There  could  be 
just  as.  much  injury  or  harm  from  weather  modification  activities  as  there  could 
be  from  air  and  water  pollution  activities.  We  hold  specifically  that  every 
landowner  has  a  property  right  in  the  clouds  and  the  water  in  them.  No  indi- 
vidual has  the  right  to  determine  for  himself  what  his  needs  are  and  produce 
these  needs  by  artificial  means  to  the  prejudice  and  detriment  of  his  neighbors.2 

Before  the  issues  of  the  rights  of  the  landowner  and  the  weather 
modifier  in  atmospheric  water  are  discussed,  it  should  be  noted  that 
some  State  statutes  specifically  reserve  the  ownership  or  right  to  use 
atmospheric  wTater  to  the  State.3 

There  have  been  a  few  cases  which  have  discussed  the  rights  of  a 
landowner  in  atmospheric  water.  As  quoted  above  the  Pennsylvania 
court  in  Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Association  v.  Blue  Ridge 
"Weather  Modification  Association  did  state  that  "*  *  *  every  land- 
owner has  a  property  right  in  the  clouds  and  the  water  in  them."  Sim- 
ilarly, in  Southwest  Weather  Research.,  Inc.  v.  Duncan,  319  S.W.  2d. 
910  ( 1958 ) ,  aff'd.  sub.  nom.  Southwest  Weailier  Research,  Inc.  v.  Jones, 
327  S.W.  2d  417  (1959) ,  the  Texas  court  stated : 

We  believe  that  the  landowner  is  entitled,  therefore  and  thereby,  to  such  rain- 
fall as  may  come  from  clouds  over  his  own  property  that  Nature,  in  her  caprice, 
may  provide. 

This  theory  enunciated  in  Southwest  Weather  Research,  Inc.  v. 
Duncan  is  similar  to  the  common  law  doctrine  of  natural  rights  which 
is  basically  a  protection  of  the  landowner's  right  to  use  his  land  in 
its  natural  condition.  One  commentator  has  stated  that  "All  forms  of 
natural  precipitation  should  be  elements  of  the  natural  condition  of 
the  land.  Precipitation,  like  air,  oxygen,  sunlight,  and  the  soil  itself, 
is  an  essential  to  many  reasonable  uses  of  the  land  *  *  *."4 

However,  in  Slutsky  v.  New  York,  97  N.Y.S.  2d  238  (1950),  a  New 
York  court  held  that  resort  owners  who  were  attempting  to  enjoin 
weather  modification  experiments  "*  *  *  clearly  (had)  no  vested 
property  rights  in  the  clouds  or  the  moisture  therein."  The  weather 
modification  experiments  in  this  case  were  undertaken  in  an  attempt 
to  supply  the  city  of  New  York  with  an  adequate  supply  of  water  in 
the  face  of  a  drought  and  the  court  also  stated  that  it  must  balance 
the  competing  interests  involved. 

All  three  of  these  cases  have  limited  value  in  resolving  the  issue  of 
a  landowner's  rights  in  atmospheric  water  since  they  involved  only 
the  narrow  issue  of  the  right  of  a  landowner  to  have  a  temporary  in- 
junction against  cloud  seeding.  Also  both  the  Pennsylvania  and  New 
York  decisions  rested  on  the  issue  of  causation;  they  both  determined 
that  the  landowner  was  not  entitled  to  relief  since  he  had  not  proved 
that  weather  modification  would  interfere  with  the  weather. 

In  the  absence  of  a  statutory  determination  of  the  ownership  of 
atmospheric  water  and  in  the  lack  of  a  well  developed  body  of  case 
law,  analogies  may  be  drawn  to  some  general  common  law  doctrines. 
The  doctrine  of  "natural  rights"  has  already  been  noted  above;  in 
addition  to  this  doctrine,  the  "ad  coelum"  doctrine  may  also  be  in- 
structive. This  concept  has  been  attributed  to  Accursius  of  Bologna 


2  Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Association  v.  Blue  Ridge  Weather  Modification  4.«so- 
Ciation,  44  D.  Jfc  C.  2d  749.  7f>9  TOO  (1968). 

"Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  s<>c.  30-20-10.°,:  La.  Rev.  Stat.  Ann.  37  sec.  2201;  Neb.  Rev  Stat.  sec. 
2-2401  :  N.  Meat.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  75-37-3  ;  N.  Dak.  Cent.  Code  sec.  2-07-01  ;  and  Wyo.  Stat. 

sec.  9-207. 

*  "Who  Owns  the  Clouds?"  1  Stan.  L  Rev.  43  (1948). 


451 


who  stated  "Cujus  est  solum  ejus  debet  esse  usque  ad  coelum."  This 
maxim  has  been  translated  as  whoever  has  the  land  ought  to  be  pos- 
sessed of  all  the  space  upward  to  an  indefinite  extent.5  Blackstone  ac- 
cepted tliis  doctrine  and  stated : 

Land  hath  also,  in  its  legal  signification,  an  indefinite  extent,  upwards  as 
well  as  downwards.  Cujus  est  solum,  ejus  est  usque  ad  coelum  (whoever  has 
the  land  possesses  all  the  space  upwards  to  an  indefinite  extent),  is  the  maxim 
of  the  law;  upwards,  therefore,  no  man  may  erect  any  building,  or  the  like  to 
overhang  another's  land  :  ...  So  that  the  word  "land"  includes  not  only  the  face 
of  the  earth,  but  every  thing  under  it,  or  over  it.® 

The  coming  of  the  airplane  required  some  modification  of  this  doc- 
trine, since  if  a  landowner  owned  the  space  above  his  land  to  an 
infinite  extent,  airplanes  would  have  been  unable  to  fly  over  land  with- 
out committing  a  trespass.  In  United  States  v.  Oausby,  328  U.S.  256 
(1945),  the  Supreme  Court  rejected  the  "ad  coelum"  doctrine  and 
stated  that  "The  air  is  a  public  highway  ..."  7  The  Supreme  Court  also 
stated  how  much  of  the  space  above  his  property  the  landowner  owns : 

The  landowner  owns  at  least  as  much  of  the  space  above  the  ground  as  he 
can  occupy  or  use  in  connection  with  the  land  .  .  .  The  fact  that  he  does  not  oc- 
cupy it  in  a  physical  sense — by  the  erection  of  buildings  and  the  like — is  not 
material.8 

It  could  be  argued  from  this  language  that  since  a  landowner  can 
use  the  space  above  the  ground  for  weather  modification  he  also  owns 
it. 

Other  analogies  may  be  drawn  to  the  doctrines  of  riparian  rights 
and  appropriation.  Riparian  rights  have  been  defined  as  ".  .  .  those 
appurtenant  to  land  abutting  a  watercourse,  granting  the  landowner 
the  right  to  reasonable  use  of  the  water,  subject  to  similar  correlative 
rights  held  by  owners  of  other  lands  abutting  the  watercourse," 9  This 
analog}'  is  also  not  a  close  one  since  atmosphere  does  not  flow  in  water- 
courses. It  has  been  stated  that  .  .  the  analogy  is  farfetched,  if  not 
false.  .  .  ." 10  An  analogy  with  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  ma}'  be 
considered  more  appropriate  since  it  gives  a  priority  of  right  based 
upon  actual  use;  however,  like  riparian  rights,  appropriation  rights  in 
water  are  limited  to  water  naturally  flowing  in  the  watercourses. 

This  doctrine  of  appropriation  would  probably  be  of  greater  help 
in  arguing  that  the  weather  modifier  has  certain  rights  in  atmospheric 
water.11  The  appropriation  doctrine  recognizes  legal  interests  based 
on  development  and  use  of  water,  not  on  land  ownership.  It  has  been 
stated  that : 

The  appropriation  of  water  consists  in  the  taking  or  diversion  of  it  from  some 
natural  stream  or  other  source  of  water  supply,  in  accordance  with  law,  with  the 


5  R.  Wright.  "The  Law  of  Airspace"  13-14  (Indianapolis  1968).  It  has  heen  stated  that 
Aceursius  had  in  mind  the  rights  of  the  owners  of  burial  plots  to  have  such  land  free  from 
overhanging  buildings.  D.  Halacy.  Jr.  "The  Weather  Changers*'  205  (New  York.  1968). 

6  2  Blackstone,  "Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  England"  ch.  2.  at  19  (p.  445  in  Cooley 
ed.  1899)  cited  in  R.  Wright,  "The  Law  of  Airspace"  12-13  (Indianapolis,  1969). 

7  United  States  v.  Causby,  328  U.S.  256,  260  (1945). 

*  8  Id.  264.  For  a  detailed  discussion  of  this  case  and  aviation  and  airspace  ownership 
generally  see  R.  Wright,  "The  Law  of  Airspace"  101-209  (Indianapolis,  1968). 

8  4  "Waters  and  Water  Rights"  471  (R.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 

10  The  Weather  Modification  Law  Project  Staff,  University  of  Arizona,  School  of  Law. 
"The  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and  Management" 
17(  1968). 

11  It  should  be  noted  that  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  is  based  on  State  statutory  or 
constitutional  provisions.  These  provisions  must  be  examined  carefully  in  determining 
rights  in  a  specific  State. 


452 


intent  to  apply  it  to  some  beneficial  use  or  purpose,  and  consummated,  within  a 
reasonable  time,  by  the  actual  application  of  all  of  the  water  to  the  use  desig- 
nated.^ 

It  has  been  argued  that  the  extension  of  the  appropriation  doctrine 
to  weather  modification  would  offer  several  advantages :  This  doctrine 
is  being  adopted  by  increasing  numbers  of  States  and  is  supported  by 
a  large  body  of  statutory  and  case  law ;  the  administrative  procedures 
of  these  statutes  could  be  extended  to  cover  the  water  obtained  from 
weather  modification;  and  the  use  of  this  doctrine  would  offer  a  unified 
approach  to  water  law.13  Disadvantages  have  also  been  noted  with 
respect  to  the  extension  of  the  doctine :  in  most  States  which  subscribe 
to  the  doctrine  of  appropriation,  the  first  weather  modifier  to  comply 
with  the  appropriation  requirements  could  take  all  the  moisture,  and 
others  would  have  no  legal  rights  to  natural  rainfall ;  the  measurement 
of  the  rain  falling  on  the  land  of  a  rain  appropriator  would  be  difficult ; 
other  raiiimaking  in  an  area  around  the  appropriator's  land  would 
have  to  be  prohibited  if  his  rights  were  to  be  protected  and  the  ques- 
tions of  proof  if  the  first  appropriator  claimed  he  did  not  get  his  share 
would  be  veiy  difficult.14 

Comparisons  have  also  been  made  between  oil  and  gas  law  and 
weather  modification.  This  analogy  is  based  upon,  the  early  theory  that 
oil  and  gas,  like  water,  were  fugitive  and  migratory  substances.  This 
early  theory  evolved  into  two  main  doctrines  of  ownership  in  oil  and 
gas:  the  "nonownership  theory"  and  the  uownership-in-place  theory": 

The  essence  of  the  "nonownership  theory"  is  that  no  person  owns  oil  and  gas 
until  it  is  produced  and  any  person  may  capture  the  oil  and  gas  if  able  to  do  so. 
An  interest  in  land  is  a  prerequisite  to  the  attempt  to  reduce  the  oil  to  possession. 
In  "ownership-in-place"  States,  the  nature  of  the  interest  of  the  landowner  in 
oil  and  gas  contained  in  his  land  is  the  same  as  his  interest  in  solid  minerals. 
[Citations  omitted.]  16 

Applying  either  of  these  two  theories  to  weather  modification  would 
appear  to  be  of  little  help  in  establishing  rights  of  a  weather  modifier 
to  atmospheric  water  since  both  involve  ownership  interests  in  land. 
It  should  be  noted  that  the  physical  differences  between  oil  and  gas 
and  atmospheric  water  may  render  the  analogy  inapplicable.16 

Analogies  to  the  concepts  of  "developed  water"  and  "imported 
water"  may  prove  to  be  more  appropriate.  Developed  waters  are 
waters  that  "would  not  but  for  man's  improvements,  have  become  part 
of  a  stream,  or  waters  that  would  otherwise  have  been  lost  by  seepage 
or  evaporation.  As  a  general  rule  these  waters  are  subject  to  appro- 
priation by  the  parties  developing  or  saving  them."  17  One  of  the 
factors  used  in  determining  whether  water  is  developed  water  is 
whether  the  water  was  added  to  the  natural  flow  by  the  energy  and 
expenditure  of  the  claimant  from  a  source  which  previously  had  no 
outlet.18  The  main  difficulty  faced  in  applying  this  concept  to  weather 

12  2  Kinney,  "Irrigation  and  Water  Rights"  (2d  ed.)  1216  cited  in  W.  Fischer,  "Weather 
Mortification  and  the  Right  of  Capture,"  8  Natural  Res.  Lawyer  639,  642  (1976). 
"  4  "W&ters  and  Water  Rights"  474,  (R.  Clark,  ed.,  1970). 
14  Ibid.  473-474. 

lsrpbe  Weather  Modificntion  Law  Troioot  Staff,  University  of  Arizona,  School  of  Law, 
"The  Loeral  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and  Management.") 

22  (1968). 

16  R.  Davis.  "State  Regulation  of  Weather  Modification."  12  Arizona  L.  Rev.  35  (1970). 
w  1  "Waters  and  Water  Rights"  341-342  (R.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 

"  The  Weather  Modification  Law  Project  Staff,  University  of  Arizona,  School  of  Law. 
"The  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and  Management,' 

23  (1968). 


453 


modifiers  is  establishing  that  the  modifier  actually  developed  the 
water.19 

Imported  water,  which  is  sometimes  referred  to  as  foreign  water,, 
is  "water  that  has  been  imported  by  a  user  from  one  watershed  into 
another.*' 20  Imported  water,  like  developed  water,  is  not  part  of  the 
natural  flow  of  water.  Persons  who  import  water  are  generally  given 
a  prior  right  to  the  capture  and  use  of  such  waters.21  It  has  been  stated 
that  the  application  of  the  doctrine  of  imported  water  to  weather 
modifiers  would  be  advantageous  since  imported  water  is  frequently 
exempted  from  the  control  of  interstate  river  compacts.22  Problems 
would  also  be  presented  by  this  analogy.  The  weather  modifier  must 
show  that  the  water  he  has  produced  has  been  shifted  from  one  water- 
shed to  another,  and  he  must  also  show  that  the  water  is  imported 
rather  than  contributory.  In  addition,  the  general  question  of  proof, 
that  is  establishing  that  the  modifier  actually  produced  the  water, 
would  present  difficulties. 

LIABILITY  FOR  WTEATHER  MODIFICATION 

If  a  drought  or  a  severe  storm  occurs  after  weather  modification  at- 
tempts have  occurred,  issues  concerning  liability  for  damages  may 
arise.  These  issues  would  include  causation  as  well  as  the  application 
of  a  number  of  theories  of  tort  recovery  including  nuisance,  strict  lia- 
bility, trespass,  and  negligence.  Other  bases  of  liability  might  be  pres- 
ent depending  on  the  particular  facts  and  circumstances  attending  any 
specific  incident.  In  addition,  issues  concerning  air  and  water  pollu- 
tion could  be  raised.  Before  a  general  discussion  of  these  issues  is  be- 
gun, it  would  be  helpful  to  examine  briefly  State  statutes  which  dis- 
cuss liability. 

Ten  State  statutes  were  found  which  discuss  liability  for  weather 
modification.  These  statutes  vary  widely  in  effect  and  complexity. 
Eight  of  these  statutes  specifically  provide  that  the  State  is  immune 
from  liability.23  Five  statutes  were  found  which  provide  that  obtain- 
ing a  license  for  weather  modification  is  not  a  defense  to  legal  actions.24 
The  statutes  on  weather  modification  are  stated  not  to  affect  private 
contractual  or  legal  obligations  in  four  States.25  Three  statutes  pro- 
vide that  weather  modification  is  not  ultrahazardous 26  while  three 
State  statutes  provide  that  weather  modification  is  not  a  trespass  27 
or,  in  one  State,  not  a  public  or  a  private  nuisance.28  In  addition,  Colo- 


19  For  a  detailed  discussion  of  this  question  of  proof,  see  W.  Fischer,  "Weather  Modifica- 
tion and  the  Right  of  Capture,"  8  Natural  Res.  Lawyer  639,  645-651  (1976). 

20  1  "Waters  and  Water  Rights,"  339  (R.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 

21  Id. 

22  The  Weather  Modification  Law  Project  Staff,  University  of  Arizona,  School  of  Law, 
"The  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and  Management," 
29  (1968). 

23  Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  36-20-122  ;  111.  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  14  3/4,  sec.  27  ;  Kan.  Stat.  sec. 
82a-1420  ;  N.  Dak.  Cent.  Code  sec.  2-07-10  ;  Okla.  Stat.  Ann.  Title  2  sec.  1418  ;  Tex.  Water 
Code  Ann.  title  2  sec.  14.101  ;  Wash.  Rev.  Code  sec.  43.37.190  and  Wyo.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  9-276. 

24  Col.  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  36-20-123;  111.  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  14  3/4,  sec.  27;  Kan.  Stat.  sec. 
82a-1420;  N.  Dak.  Cent.  Code  sec.  2-07-10;  Tex.  Water  Code  Ann.  title  2  sec.  14.101. 

25  Okla.  Stat.  Ann.  title  2  sec.  1418;  Tex.  Water  Code  Ann.  title  2  sec.  14.101  (with 
certain  exceptions)  ;  Wash.  Rev.  Code  Ann.  sec.  43.37.190  ;  Wis.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  19^.40. 

26  111.  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  14  3/4,  sec.  27  ;  N.  Dak.  Cent.  Code  sec.  2-07-10  ;  Tex.  Water  Code 
title  2  sec.  14.101. 

27  111.  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  14  3/4,  sec.  27  ;  N.  Dak.  Cent.  Code  sec.  2-07-10 ;  Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  sec. 
36-20-123. 

28  Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  36-20-123. 


454 


rado  and  Illinois  statutes  provide  that  failure  to  obtain  a  license  or 
a  permit  for  weather  modification  constitutes  negligence  29  per  se 
while  Wisconsin  provides  that  unregulated  weather  modification 
operations  shall  be  subject  to  summary  abatement  public  nuisances.30 
Illinois  and  Xorth  Dakota  also  provide  that  a  person  adversely 
affected  by  weather  modification  shall  not  be  prevented  by  a  statute 
on  weather  modification  from  recovering  damages  resulting  from  in- 
tentional harmful  actions  or  negligent  conduct.31  Finally,  West  Vir- 
ginia provides  that  any  licensee  who  causes  a  drought  or  a  heavy 
downpour  or  storm  which  causes  damage  to  land  as  determined  by  the 
West  Virginia  Aeronautics  Commission  shall  compensate  farmers  and 
property  owners  for  such  damage.32 

Before  any  case  for  liability  for  weather  modification  can  be  made, 
it  must  first  be  proved  that  the  weather  modifier  did  in  fact  cause 
the  drought,  storm,  or  heavy  rainfall  which  led  to  the  damage  for 
which  compensation  is  sought.33  Due  to  scientific  uncertainties,  this 
is  a  very  heavy  burden  of  proof  for  the  plaintiff  and  is  not  often  met. 
State  statutes  on  weather  modification  provide  few  guidelines  con- 
cerning causation.  Of  the  10  State  statutes  which  discuss  liability  for 
weather  modification,  only  the  West  Virginia  statute  discusses  causa- 
tion and  there  the  statute  simply  recites  that  whether  or  not  a  weather 
modifier  causes  a  drought  or  a  storm  shall  be  determined  by  the  West 
Virginia  Aeronautics  Commission. 

The  test  which  is  used  most  often  in  tort  law  to  determine  whether 
a  causal  relationship  exists  is  the  ubut  for'  test.  This  test  states  that 
an  activity  is  the  cause  in  fact  of  a  claimed  consequence  where  the 
event  would  not  have  occurred  but  for  the  conduct  of  the  actor.34 
This  test  has  been  used  in  some  weather  modification  cases  35  but 
"judicial  experience  to  date  has  shown  that  proof  of  cause  in  fact  is 
a  serious  obstacle  to  recovery  of  damages  from  a  weather  modifier 
and  to  securing  injunctive  relief  to  bar  his  continued  operations.'' 36 

Several  different  theories  of  tort  liability  may  be  argued  in  a 
weather  modification  case;  strict  liability,  nuisance,  negligence,  and 
trespass.  As  noted  above,  some  State  statutes  specifically  allow  or  pro- 
hibit some  of  these  types  of  suits.  Illinois,  North  Dakota,  and  Texas 
all  provide  that  weather  modification  is  not  ultrahazardous  which  in 
effect  bars  the  use  of  the  theory  of  strict  liability.  Strict  liability  re- 
sults when  an  activity  is  found  to  be  ultrahazardous,  which  has  been 
defined  as  •"necessarily  involving  ...  a  risk  of  serious  harm  to  the 
person,  land,  or  chattels  of  others  which  cannot  be  eliminated  by  the 

29  Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  36-20-123  ;  111.  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  14  3/4,  sec.  27. 

30  Wis.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  195.40. 

sl  111.  Ami.  Stat.  ch.  14  3/4.  sec.  27  ;  N.  Dak.  Cent.  Code  sec.  2-07-10. 
~  W.  Va.  Code  sec.  29-2B-13. 

":  This  question  of  proof  is  very  similar  to  that  which  is  faced  by  the  weather  modifies 
in  attempting  to  prove  that  certain  waters  are  his  since  he  caused  them.  See  W.  Fischer, 
•  Weather  Modification  and  the  Right  of  Capture."  S  Natural  Res.  Lawyer  639  ,  645—651 
(1976). 

3*  4  "Waters  and  Water  Rights"  477-47S  (It.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 

35  See.  e.g.  Davis  and  St.  Amand.  "Proof  of  Legal  Causation  in  Weather  Modification 
Litigation  :  h'einbold  v.  Sumner  Farmers,  Inc..  and  Irving  P.  Krick,  Inc."  7  J.  of  Weather 
cation  127  (April  197r>)  ;  4  "Waters  and  Water  Rights"  478-479  (R.  Clark,  ed.  19701. 

6  The  Weather  Modification  Law  Project  Staff.  University  of  Arizona.  School  of  Law. 
"The  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and  Management! 
12  (1968)  :  set?  also.  R.  Johnson.  "Weather  Modification  Legal  Study"  2-4,  prepared  for 
the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  Feh.  28,  1977. 


455 


utmost  care."  37  In  determining  whether  cloud  seeding  is  an  abnor- 
mally dangerous  activity,  it  has  been  stated  that  courts  would  consider 
the  following  factors: 

(a)  Whether  the  activity  involves  a  high  degree  of  risk  of  some 
harm  to  the  person,  land,  or  chattels  of  others ; 

(b)  Whether  the  gravity  of  the  harm  which  may  result  from  it 
is  likely  to  be  great ; 

(c)  Whether  the  risk  cannot  be  eliminated  by  the  exercise  of 
reasonable  care ; 

(d)  Whether  the  activity  is  not  a  matter  of  common  usage; 

(e)  Whether  the  activity  is  inappropriate  to  the  place  where 
it  is  carried  on ;  and 

(/)  The  value  of  the  activity  to  the  community.38 
No  case  has  been  found  where  a  court  characterized  weather  modi- 
fication as  ultrahazardous  and  therefore  subject  to  strict  liability; 
however,  this  may  occur  in  the  future  particularly  with  regard  to 
certain  types  of  attempted  weather  modification  such  as  that  involv- 
ing hurricanes. 

Nuisance  is  another  liability  theory  which  may  prove  useful  in 
weather  modification  cases.  Nuisance  has  been  described  as  conduct 
whi  h  .  .  invades  an  owner's  interest  in  the  use  and  enjoyment  of 
his  land,  and  such  invasion  is  intentional  and  unreasonable,  negligent 
or  reckless  or  regarded  as  an  abnormally  dangerous  activity.'7  39  Con- 
troversies over  nuisances  are  often  resolved  by  balancing  the  utility 
of  the  defendant's  conduct  with  the  harm  it  causes.40  Due  to  these 
characteristics  of  nuisance,  it  has  been  regarded  by  some  writers 

.  .  as  potentially  the  most  useful  in  weather  modification  cases.'' 41 
However,  it  should  be  noted  that  a  Colorado  statute  specifically  pro- 
vides that  weather  modification  is  not  a  public  or  private  nuisance.42 

Negligence  ma}T  also  be  used  as  a  theory  for  recovery  in  weather 
modification  cases.  There  are  four  main  elements  which  are  necessary 
to  provide  a  cause  of  action  using  negligence.  There  must  be:  (1)  A 
duty  recognized  by  the  law.  which  requires  the  actor  to  conform  to 
a  certain  standard  of  conduct;  (-2)  a  failure  to  conform  to  the  stand- 
ard required:  (3)  a  reasonably  close  causal  connection  between  the 
conduct  and  the  resulting  injury;  and  (4)  actual  loss  or  damages 
suffered  by  the  plaintiff.43  Aside  from  the  difficulties  presented  by  show- 
ing a  causal  connection,  another  difficulty  with  the  application  of  this 
theory  to  weather  modification  is  that  a  standard  for  performance 
must  be  established  against  which  the  weather  modifier  can  be 
measured. 

Trespass  as  a  theory  of  tort  liability  may  also  prove  to  be  applicable 
to  weather  modification.  Trespass  may  consist  of  an  entry  of  a  person 
or  thing  upon  land  which  is  in  the  possession  of  the  plaintiff.44  The 
rejection  of  the  "ad  coelum"  doctrine  in  United  States  v.  Causby,  328 


37  4  Restatement  of  Torts  sec.  319. 

38  R.  Davis.  "Weather  Modification  Litigation  and  Statutes."  in  "Weather  and  Climate 
Modification"  773  (ed.  W.  Hess  1974). 

» Id. 

40  Prosser  Torts,  sec.  87.  4th  ed.  (1971L 

°  R.  Davis.  "Weather  Modification  Litigation  and  Statutes",  in  "Weather  and  Climate 
Modification"  773  (ed.  W.  Hess  1974). 
42  Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  3R-20-123. 
«Prosser  Torts  sec.  30  (4th  ed.  1971). 
**  Id.  sec.  13. 


456 


U.S.  256  (1945) ,  indicates  that  the  flight  of  an  airplane  over  a  person's 
land  would  not  necessarily  be  considered  a  trespass.  However,  it  could 
be  argued  that  the  release  of  particles  into  the  air  by  an  airplane  or 
by  a  weather  modification  station  on  the  ground  might  be  considered 
a  trespass  if  they  invaded  the  plaintiff's  land.  It  could  also  be  argued 
that  rain,  hail  or  other  precipitation  produced  by  weather  modifica- 
tion would  be  a  trespass  since  it  did  not  fall  there  naturally  but  was 
produced  artificially.45  These  arguments  could  be  supported  by  citing 
various  cases  which  have  found  a  trespass  even  where  invisible  or 
microscopic  particles  have  entered  on  the  plaintiffs  land  they  have 
caused  harm.46 

In  addition  to  the  various  types  of  tort  liability  discussed  above, 
weather  modifiers  may  also  be  held  liable  for  pollution  or  for  adverse 
environmental  impacts.  Weather  modification  not  only  attempts  to- 
change  the  environment  by  producing  precipitation  but  also  adds  small 
quantities  of  silver  iodide  or  other  artificial  nucleants  to  the  water  or 
other  precipitation  it  causes.  In  Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Asso- 
ciation v.  Blue  Ridge  Weather  Modification,  44  D.  &  C.  2d  749  (1968) ,. 
the  court  discussed  the  possible  environmental  damage  which  could  be 
done  by  weather  modification  and  quoted  a  report  of  a  bureau  of  re- 
clamation which  stated  the  artificial  nucleants  used  in  cloud  seeding 
are  to  varying  extents  poisonous.  However,  the  court  held  that  there 
was  no  more  than  a  possibility  of  harm  and  so  did  not  issue  an  injunc- 
tion. It  should  also  be  noted  that  the  National  Environmental  Policy 
Act  of  1969,  42  U.S.C.  §  4321  et  seq.,  may  be  relevant  when  weather 
modification  is  federally  sponsored.47  For  example  an  environmental 
impact  statement  would  be  necessary  in  certain  circumstances  where 
the  Federal  Government  was  involved. 

DEFENSES  WHICH  MAY  BE  RAISED  AGAINST  CLAIMS  OF  LIABILITY 

In  addition  to  the  general  defense  that  the  plaintiff  has  failed  to 
establish  a  cause  of  action,  certain  other  defenses  may  be  available  to 
a  weather  modifier.  These  would  include  immunity,  privilege,  consent 
and  waste. 

If  the  weather  modifier  was  operating  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Federal,  State,  or  local  government,  the  doctrne  of  sovereign  immunity 
from  suit  may  be  employed.  The  Federal  Tort  Claims  Art,  28  U.S.C. 
§  2671  et  seq.,  waived  certain  immunities  of  the  Federal  Government; 
specificallv,  its  immunity  from  liability  from  the  negligent  or  wrong- 
ful acts  of  its  employees  who  are  acting  within  the  scope  of  their  em- 
ployment. This  act  kept  immunity  for  the  exercise  of  discretionary 
functions,  however.  It  has  been  stated  that  the  application  of  this  doc- 
trine to  weather  modification  on  the  Federal  level  means  that : 

Federal  weather  modifiers,  then,  may  expose  the  United  States  to  liability  for 
injury  careless  performance  of  their  day-to-day  operations  ;  but  likely  the  Federal 
Government  will  be  immune  from  liability  for  its  decision  to  conduct  weather 
modification  operations  and  for  its  plans  relating  to  the  operations.48 


*'  Note,  "Legal  Aspects  of  Weather  Modification  in  Texas,"  25  Baylor  L.  Rev.  501,  509-510 
*n  Proper  Torts,  sop.  13  (4th  od.  1071). 

47  Son  R.  On  vis.  "Wonthor  Modifion  tion  T^mr  Developments."  27  Oklahoma  L.  Rev.  400, 
430  430  (1074)  :  "Wenthor  Modification."  hearings  hefore  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Envi- 
ronment and  the  Atmosphere  of  the  House  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  04th 
Cong..  2d  soss.  421  420  (1070).  ( gta tement  of  ihc  Natural  Uosources  Defense  Council,  Inc.) 

48  4  "Waters  and  Water  Rights"  403-404  (R.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 


457 


The  doctrine  of  sovereign  immunity  with  regard  to  the  States  is  in  a 
somewhat  uncertain  condition  although  it  may  provide  immunity  to 
State  employed  weather  modifiers  in  some  cases.  It  should  also  be 
noted  that  eight  States,  Colorado,  Illinois,  Kansas,  North  Dakota, 
Oklahoma,  Texas,  Washington,  and  Wyoming,  statutorily  mandate 
that  the  State  is  immune  from  certain  liability  for  weather  modifica- 
tion.49 

The  application  of  the  doctrine  of  sovereign  immunity  to  local  gov- 
ernments has  resulted  in  a  distinction  between  proprietary  and  govern- 
mental functions.  It  has  been  stated  that : 

The  application  of  this  most  unwieldly  and  unreliable  test  to  weather  modifi- 
cation will  not  be  easy.  For  instance,  a  municipality's  operation  of  a  waterworks 
for  supplying  water  to  its  inhabitants  (which  would  seem  at  first  glance  to  be 
a  governmental  operation)  has  been  held  to  be  a  proprietary  operation — sub- 
jecting the  municipality  to  liability  in  tort.  Thus,  water  supply  augmentation 
through  precipitation  modification  may  well  be  a  part  of  that  proprietary 
function.50 

Public  necessity  could  also  be  argued  as  a  defense  to  liability.  This 
defense  has  actually  been  suggested  in  two  cases  although  it  was  not 
determinative  in  either  of  them.  In  Slutsky  v.  New  York,  97  N.Y.S.  2d 
238  (1950),  resort  owners  had  filed  for  a  temporary  injunction  to  pro- 
hibit New  York  City  from  engaging  in  experiments  which  attempted  to 
produce  rain.  The  court  held  that  these  experiments  would  not  inter- 
fere with  the  plaintiffs  resort  business  "to  any  appreciable  extent"  and 
so  denied  the  injunction.  In  arriving  at  this  holding,  the  court  empha- 
sized that  it  must  balance  the  competing  interests  and  stated  that  "The 
relief  which  plaintiffs  ask  is  opposed  to  the  general  welfare  and  public 
good.  *  *  *"  Similarly,  in  Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Association  v. 
Blue  Ridge  Weather  Modification  Association,  44  D.  &  C.  2d  749 
(1968) ,  the  court  refused  to  issue  an  injunction  in  the  absence  of  proof 
that  damages  resulted  from  weather  modification  activities  but  did  dis- 
cuss public  necessity.  The  court  there  stated : 

No  individual  has  the  right  to  determine  for  himself  what  his  needs  are  and 
produce  those  needs  by  artificial  means  to  the  prejudice  and  detriment  of  his 
neighbors.  However,  we  feel  that  this  cannot  be  an  unqualified  right.  Weather 
modification  takes  many  forms  and  produces,  or  appears  to  produce,  desirable 
effects.  For  example,  there  is  fog  suppression,  lightning  suppression,  and  hail 
suppression.  In  additon,  cloud  seeding  has  been  used  and  will  continue  to  be 
used  to  produce  rain  to  relieve  the  water  shortage  in  our  urban  areas.  We  feel  then 
that  weather  modification  activities  undertaken  in  the  public  interests,  and  under 
the  direction  and  control  of  governmental  authority  should  and  must  be 
permitted.51 

The  consent  of  a  landowner  to  weather  modification  which  may 
affect  his  land  may  also  be  raised  as  a  defense  to  liability.  In  addition, 
a  weather  modifier  could  also  attempt  to  raise  as  a  defense  the  public 
policy  against  waste.52 

INTERSTATE  ALLOCATION  OF  ATMOSPHERIC  WATER 

Weather  modification  activities  and  their  results  do  not  always  fall 
neatly  inside  State  boundaries.  When  they  do  not,  substantial  issues 

49  For  citations  to  these  statutes  see  footnote  23  supra. 

50  4  "Waters  and  Water  Rights"  494  (R.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 

51  Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Association  v.  Blue  Ridge  Weather  Modification 
Association.  44  D.  &  C.  2d  749,  760  (1968). 

52  For  a  discussion  of  these  two  theories  of  defense  see  4  "Waters  and  Water  Rights" 
497-498  (R.  Clark,  ed.  1970). 


458 


may  arise;  for  instance,  does  cloud  seeding  in  one  State  take  water 
which  should  have  fallen  in  another  State  ?  No  cases  have  arisen  which 
directly  deal  with  the  issues  raised  by  the  interstate  nature  of  weather 
modification  although  Pennsylvania  ex  Tel.  Township  of  Ayr  v.  Fulk, 
No.  53  (Court  of  Common  Pleas,  Fulton  County,  Pa.,  Feb.  28,  1968), 
did  touch  upon  some  of  these  issues.  In  that  case  a  weather  modifier  who 
operated  a  generator  in  Ayr  Township  to  suppress  hail  in  West  Vir- 
ginia and  Maryland  was  convicted  of  violating  an  ordinance  which 
made  cloud  seeding  an  olfense.  The  weather  modifier  alleged  that  the 
township  ordinance  was  unconstitutional  because  it  imposed  an  undue 
burden  on  interstate  commerce  but  the  court  did  not  agree  and  stated 
that  the  ordinance  was  never  intended  to  regulate  commerce  and  that 
weather  modification  may  not  even  be  commerce.53 

More  recently,  a  dispute  has  arisen  between  Idaho  and  Washington 
concerning  cloud  seeding  in  Washington  which  allegedly  takes  water 
from  clouds  which  would  normally  discharge  their  water  over  Idaho. 
Some  Idaho  officials  have  termed  the  cloud  seeding  "cloud  rustling" 
and  threatened  to  file  suit.54  No  suits  on  this  controversy  have  yet  been 
filed,  however. 

Although  no  court  resolution  of  the  interstate  problems  involved  in 
weather  modification  has  been  found,  some  States  have  attempted  to 
resolve  the  problem  by  the  use  of  legislation  or  interstate  compacts. 
Twelve  States  have  been  found  which  have  legislation  discussing  the 
interstate  aspects  of  weather  modification.  Eight  of  these  have  statutes 
which  authorize  the  board  or  commission  which  is  responsible  for 
weather  modification  to  represent  the  State  concerning  interstate 
compacts  or  agreements  on  weather  modification.53  Two  States,  Colo- 
rado and  New  Mexico,  have  statutes  which  provide  that  weather  modi- 
fication for  the  benefit  of  other  States  cannot  be  carried  on  in  the  State 
with  this  legislation  unless  the  State  which  could  be  benefited  also 
allows  weather  modification  to  benefit  the  State  with  this  legislation.56 

Pennsylvania  and  West  Virginia  have  statutes  which  provide  that 
their  weather  modification  law  does  not  authorize  a  person  to  carry  out 
a  cloud  seeding  operation  from  these  States  for  the  benefit  of  another 
State  which  forbids  weather  modification.57  Utah  has  a  statute  which 
prohibits  cloud  seeding  in  Utah  for  an  adjoining  target  State  except 
upon  full  compliance  with  the  laws  of  the  target  State  and  the  law  of 
Utah.58 

Another  method  of  overcoming  the  problems  presented  by  the  inter- 
state nature  of  weather  modification  would  be  to  arrive  at  informal 
agreements  with  adjoining  States.  Several  States  provide  that  the 
board  which  is  responsible  for  weather  modifications  has  the  power  to 
enter  into  these  agreements.  However,  organizations  resulting  from 
these  agreements  would  possess  little  power  to  make  binding  decisions.5* 


63  For  a  more  detailed  discussion  and  criticism  of  this  case  see  R.  Davis.  "Weather 
Modification  Litigation  and  Statutes,"  in  "Weather  and  Climate  Modification"  782-783  (ed. 
W.  Hess  1974). 

64  B.  Richards,  "Rainmaking  Effort  Triggers  Battle  Over  Cloud  Rustling,"  the  Washington 
Post.  A-5  Mar.  1.  1977. 

55  Conn.  Gen.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  24-7:  111.  Stat.  Ann.  ch.  146  3/4,  sec.  9;  Kan.  Stat.  sec. 
82a-1405(f)  ;  New  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  544.080(7)  ;  N.  Mex.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  2-07-02.5:  Okla, 
Stat.  Ann.  sec.  1403(7)  ;  Tex.  Water  Code  Ann.  title  2  sec.  14.018;  Wash.  Rev.  Code  sec' 
43.37.640. 

MColo.  Rev.  Stat.  sec.  36-20-118,  N.  Mex.  Stat.  Ann.  sec.  75-37-12. 
w  Pa.  Stat.  Ann.  title  3  sec.  1115  ;  W.  Va.  Code  sec.  29-2B-14. 
m  ri;.<>  Code  Ann.  tec.  73-15-8. 

59  R.  Davis,  "State  Regulation  of  Weather  Modification,"  12  Arizona  L.  Rev.  35,  67  (1970). 


459 


I  method  which  could  also  be  used  would  be  that  of  an  interstate 
ompact.  Article  I,  §  10,  cl.  3  of  the  U.S.  Constitution  states  that  "No 
>tate  shall,  without  the  Consent  of  Congress,  *  *  *  enter  into  any 
Agreement  or  Compact  with  another  State.  *  *  *"  With  the  exception 
if  the  limitation  that  the  consent  of  Congress  must  be  obtained,  the 
Constitution  confirmed  the  right  of  the  States  to  make  compacts  with 
ach  other.  It  has  been  stated  that  an  interstate  compact  has  the  same 
ffect  as  a  treaty  between  sovereign  powers.60 

No  interstate  compacts  specifically  concerning  weather  modifica- 
ion  were  found;  however,  some  existing  compacts,  especially  those 
vhich  allocate  waters  of  interstate  streams,  may  be  applicable  to 
veather  modification.  For  example,  if  a  compact  provides  that  half  of 
he  waters  in  a  river  are  to  go  to  one  State  and  half  to  another,  the 
veather  modifier  may  have  no  rights  in  the  water  he  has  allegedly 
xroduced  since  it  would  go  into  the  river  and  be  subject  to  the  provi- 
ions  of  the  compact.61  It  could  also  be  argued  that  an  agency  like  the 
^ew  York  Port  Authority  has  the  authority  to  engage  certain  weather 
iiodification  techniques  such  as  fog  dissipation.62  Certain  Supreme 
^ourt  decisions  concerning  the  use  of  interstate  waters  may  also 
>e  helpful  in  allocating  water  in  clouds  which  pass  over  State 
)oundaries.63 

METHODS  OF  CONTROLLING  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

There  are  several  methods  by  which  weather  modification  is  or  could 
>e  controlled.  These  include  State  or  local  regulation,  regulation  by 
)rofessional  associations  and  Federal  regulation.  Twenty-eight  States 
\rere  found  which  have  some  type  of  statute  pertaining  to  weather 
nodification.  These  statutes  differ  greatly  in  their  content.  Hawaii,  for 
xample,  simply  states  that  the  board  of  land  and  natural  resources 
hall  have  the  power  "To  investigate  and  make  surveys  of  water  re- 
ources,  including  the  possibility  and  feasibility  of  inducing  rain  by 
rtificial  or  other  means  .  .  On  the  other  hand,  some  States,  such  as 
Colorado,  have  comprehensive  laws  which  include  such  provisions  as 

declaration  of  general  policy,  licensing,  operations  affecting  weather 
n  other  States,  legal  recourse,  and  judicial  review.64  The  basis  for  the 
nactment  of  this  type  of  legislation  is  the  police  power.  The  police 

ower  enables  a  State  to  take  action  to  protect  and  promote  the  health, 

ifety,  morals  and  general  welfare  of  its  people65 
Some  State  statutes  provide  for  control  of  weather  modification  by 

Iministrative  agencies.  In  these  cases  the  legislature  would  most 

kely  provide  some  guidance  for  the  agency  and  then  let  the  agency 

rovide  for  more  specific  situations  by  promulgating  regulations.66  It 


60  For  a  more  detailed  discussion  of  the  legal  effect  of  interstate  compacts  see  Con- 
cessional Research  Service,  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  of  America — Analysis 
id  Interpretation  419-423  (1973). 

61  For  a  discussion  of  some  of  these  compacts  see  note,  "Weather  Modification  and  the 
tght  of  Capture,"  8  Natural  Res.  Lawyer  639.  652-654  (1976). 

02  R.  Davis.  "State  Regulation  of  Weather  Modification."  12  Arizona  L.  Rev.  35.  67  (1970). 
63  See  note.  "Weather  Modification  and  the  Right  of  Capture,"  8  Natural  Res.  Lawyer  639, 
4-65o  (1976). 

w  Copies  of  the  weather  modification  statutes  and  a  chart  can  be  found  in  appendix  D. 
*  Shapiro  and  Tresolini,  "American  Constitutional  Law"  116-117  (New  York  1975). 
ee  rphe  leather  Modification  Law  Project  Staff,  University  of  Arizona.  School  of  Law. 
'he  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and  Management" 
-88  (196S). 


460 


has  been  stated  that  regulation  of  weather  modification  by  an  adminis- 
trative agency  would  have  certain  advantages  including  administra- 
tive expertise,  continuity  of  the  administrative  regulatory  program, 
and  flexibility  and  completeness  of  control.67 

State  statutes  would  also  be  subject  to  judicial  review.  Although 
there  have  been  very  few  cases  discussing  weather  modification,  the 
number  of  these  cases  has  risen  in  recent  years  and  there  are  indica- 
tions that  there  will  be  even  more  litigation  in  the  future.  Such  law- 
suits, which  determine  the  sx^ecific  legal  rights  of  individual  plain- 
tiffs and  defendants,  will  provide  precedents  which  will  be  helpful  not 
only  in  future  cases  but  also  in  advising  individuals  who  have  not 
become  involved  in  a  lawsuit  what  the  law  has  been  so  that  they  may 
act  with  some  knowledge  of  the  possible  consequences.68  However, 
it  has  been  stated  that  judicial  control  alone  would  be  incomplete  and 
would  not  have  the  continuity  or  expertise  of  an  administrative 
agency.69 

A  State  may  also  attempt  to  control  weather  modification  by  be- 
coming the  proprietor  of  weather  modification  activities.  Using  this 
method  the  State  could  use  either  government  employees  or  hire 
contractors  to  modify  the  weather.  It  has  been  stated  that  State  reg- 
ulation of  weather  modification  by  this  contract  method  would  have 
several  advantages :  It  would  be  comparatively  easy  to  administer,  it 
would  provide  a  source  of  funds,  and  it  would  provide  a  method  for 
enforcing  payment  to  weather  modifiers  by  those  who  receive  the  bene- 
fit of  their  services.70 

State  regulation  of  weather  modification  in  general  has  also  been 
seen  to  have  certain  advantages  and  disadvantages.  It  has  been  ob- 
served that  the  advantages  would  include  the  following:  First,  State 
statutes  provide  a  testing  ground  to  experiment  and  see  what  scheme 
of  regulation  is  the  most  successful ;  second,  some  States  have  no  need 
for  regulation  of  weather  modification  since  no  weather  modification 
occurs  in  these  States ;  and  third,  State  agencies  would  be  closer  to  the 
persons  regulated  and  those  affected  by  weather  modification  than  a 
Federal  agency.  Disadvantages  have  also  been  observed  in  State  reg- 
ulation; for  example,  the  fact  that  clouds  are  no  respecters  of  State 
boundary  lines.  In  addition,  it  has  been  argued  that  State  legislatures 
may  be  susceptible  to  local  lobbying.71 

Professional  associations  of  weather  modifiers  could  also  attempt 
to  regulate  their  members.  Although  this  would  have  the  advantage 
of  having  knowledgeable  persons  doing  the  regulating  and  could  cover 
interstate  situations,  it  would  also  have  disadvantages.  For  example, 
such  regulators  might  be  reluctant  to  impose  restrictions  which  might 
harm  their  business.  In  addition,  not  all  weather  modifiers  would  neces- 
saril}T  be  members  of  such  professional  associations  and  their  powers 
of  enforcement  of  regulations  would  be  exceedingly  limited. 


67  R.  Davis,  "State  Regulation  of  Weather  Modification."  12  Arizona  L.  Rev.  35,  55  (1970). 

ftS  For  discussions  of  judicial  control  of  weather  modification  see  R.  Davis,  "Strategic 
for  State  Regulation  of  Weather  Modification,"  in  "Controlling  the  Weather"  182-194  (ed. 
II.  Taubenfeld  1970)  ;  The  Weather  Modification  Law  Project  Staff,  University  of  Arizona, 
School  of  Law,  "The  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and 
Management"  S5-86  (196S). 

■  R.  Davis.  "State  Regulation  of  Weather  Modification,"  12  Arizona  L.  Rev.  35,  56  (1970). 

70  Id.  60-61. 

n  Id.  64-65. 


461 


COXGRESSIOXAL  AUTHORITY  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION  TO  REGULATE  OR 
LICENSE  "WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES 

Weather  modification  could  also  be  controlled  by  Federal  statute. 
However,  in  order  to  enact  valid  legislation,  Congress  must  find  a  grant 
of  power  in  the  Constitution  which  would  allow  such  legislation.  There 
are  several  grants  of  power  to  Congress  which  would  be  sufficient  au- 
thority for  the  regulation  of  weather  modification  activities.  The  most 
important  of  these  is  the  power  given  to  Congress  under  the  commerce 
clause  which  states  that  "The  Congress  shall  have  Power  To  .  .  .  reg- 
ulate Commerce  with  foreign  Nations,  and  among  the  several  States, 
and  with  the  Indian  Tribes."  72  Authority  for  such  regulation  may  to 
some  extent  also  be  found  under  the  sections  granting  Congress  fiscal 
power,  war  power,  property  power  and  treaty  power.  The  major  em- 
phasis of  this  section  will  be  on  the  commerce  clause:  however,  the 
other  powers  will  be  discussed  briefly.  Prior  to  a  discussion  of  the  com- 
merce power,  it  would  be  helpful  to  briefly  discuss  the  principle  of 
federalism. 

Federalism 

Federalism  is  one  of  the  basic  concepts  underlying  the  U.S. 
Constitution.  It  has  been  defined  as  "*  *  *  a  principle  of  government 
Which  provides  for  the  division  of  powers  between  a  national  govern- 
ment and  a  collection  of  State  governments  operating  over  the  same 
geographic  area."  73  The  Federal  Government  possesses  all  those  pow- 
ers which  are  delegated  to  it  either  expressly  or  by  implication  by 
the  Constitution.  As  is  explicitly  stated  in  the  10th  amendment,  the 
State  governments  possess  those  powers  which  are  not  given  to  the 
Federal  Government  or  denied  to  the  States.  Recent  Supreme  Court 
cases,  in  particular  National  League  of  Cities  v.  Usery,  426  U.S.  833 
(1976),  have  been  interpreted  by  some  commentators  as  indicating  a 

*  *  resurrection  of  the  Madisonian  concept  of  a  restricted  Federal 
Government  resulting  in  a  more  active  role  for  the  10th  amend- 
ment." 74  This  recent  change  in  interpretation,  if  indeed  there  has  been 
a  significant  change,  has  occurred  mainly  as  a  limitation  on  congres- 
sional use  of  the  commerce  clause  power  and  will  be  discussed  in  more 
detail  in  the  discussion  of  the  commerce  clause. 

The  commerce  clause 

The  commerce  clause  has  generally  been  interpreted  broadly  by  the 
Supreme  Court  and  has  been  described  as  "*  *  *  the  direct  source  of 
the  most  important  powers  which  the  Federal  Government  exercises  in 
peacetime,  and  except  for  the  due  process  and  equal  protection  clauses 
of  the  14th  amendment,  it  is  the  most  important  limitation  imposed  by 
the  Constitution  on  the  exercise  of  State  power."  75  The  use  of  the 
commerce  clause  as  a  source  of  Federal  power  is  the  most  relevant  to 
the  discussion  here ;  however,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  only  case 
found  which  discussed  the  commerce  clause  and  weather  modification 

7-  O  S.  Constitution  art.  I.  sec.  8.  cl.  3. 

'■■  Chase  and  Ducat.  "Constitutional  Interpretation"  375  (St.  Paul  1974). 

»  Note.  "Constitutional  Law — Tenth  Amendment  as  an  Affirmative  Limitation  on  Com- 
merce Power.  National  League  of  Cities  v.  Usery,  426  U.S.  S33  (1976),"  8  Toledo  L.  Rev. 
796.  R09  (1977). 

"  Congressional  Research  Service.  "The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  of  America — 
Analysis  and  Interpretation"  142  (Washington  1973). 

34-8o7 — 79  32 


462 


was  one  in  which  the  commerce  clause  was  discussed  as  a  limitation  on 
the  exercise  of  State  power.  This  case,  Pennsylvania  ex  rel.  Township 
of  Ayr  v.  Fulk,  No.  53  (Court  of  Common  Pleas,  Fulton  County,  Pa., 
Feb.  28,  1968),  arose  when  a  weather  modifier  who  operated  a  gener- 
ator in  Ayr  Township  to  suppress  hail  in  West  Virginia  and  Maryland 
was  convicted  of  violating  an  ordinance  which  made  cloud  seeding  an 
offense.  The  weather  modifier  alleged  that  the  township  ordinance  was 
unconstitutional  because  it  imposed  an  undue  burden  on  interstate  com- 
merce but  the  court  did  not  agree  and  stated  that  the  ordinance  was 
never  intended  to  regulate  commerce  and  that  weather  modification 
may  not  even  be  commerce.  This  case  has  been  strongly  criticized  as 
ignoring  the  numerous  Supreme  Court  cases  which  have  interpreted 
the  term  "commerce"  very  broadly  and  it  is  of  questionable  use  as  per- 
suasive authority.76 

The  commerce  clause  generally. — The  commerce  clause  was  first  dis- 
cussed in  Gibbons  v.  Ogden,  9  Wheat.  (22  U.S.)  1  (1824).  This  land- 
mark case  ai'ose  when  a  monopoly  granted  by  New  York  State  on  the 
operation  of  certain  vessels  in  its  Avaters  was  challenged  by  Gibbons 
who  transported  passengers  pursuant  to  an  act  of  Congress.  Speaking 
for  the  Court,  Chief  Justice  Marshall  stated : 

The  subject  to  be  regulated  is  commerce;  and  our  Constitution  being,  as  was 
aptly  said  at  the  bar,  one  of  enumeration,  and  not  of  definition,  to  ascertain  the 
extent  of  the  power,  it  becomes  necessary  to  settle  the  meaning  of  the  word.  The 
counsel  for  the  appellee  would  limit  it  to  traffic,  to  buying  and  selling,  or  the 
interchange  of  commodities,  and  do  not  admit  that  it  comprehends  navigation. 
This  would  restrict  a  general  term,  applicable  to  many  objects,  to  one  of  its  sig- 
nifications. Commerce,  undoubtedly,  is  traffic,  but  is  something  more :  it  is  inter- 
course. At  189. 

Chief  Justice  Marshall  also  addressed  the  question  of  what  is  the 
power  to  regulate  commerce  and  stated  : 

It  is  the  power  to  regulate;  that  is,  to  prescribe  the  rule  by  which  commerce 
is  to  be  governed  *  *  *.  The  power  of  Congress,  then,  comprehends  navigation 
within  the  limits  of  every  State  in  the  union;  so  far  as  that  navigation  may  be, 
in  any  manner,  connected  with  "commerce  with  foreign  nations,  or  among,  the 
several  States,  or  with  the  Indian  tribes."  At  190-197. 

Although  the  commerce  power  was  interpreted  more  narrowly  dur- 
ing the  early  1930's,"  the  expansive  interpretation  was  soon  evident 

again.  Several  cases  were  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  1942  dis- 
cussing the  commerce  clause.  In  United  States  v.  Wrighticood  Dairy 
Co.,  315  U.S.  110,  119  (1942),  the  Supreme  Court  stated  that : 

The  commerce  power  is  not  confined  in  its  exercise  to  the  regulation  of  com- 
merce among  the  States.  It  extends  to  tbose  activities  intrastate  which  so  affect 
interstate  commerce,  or  the  exertion  of  the  power  of  Congress  over  it.  as  to 
make  regulation  of  them  appropriate  means  to  the  attainment  of  a  legitimate 
end,  the  effective  execution  of  the  granted  power  to  regulate  interstate  com- 
merce *  *  *  the  marketing  of  a  local  product  in  competition  with  that  of  a  like 
commodity  moving  interstate  may  so  interfere  with  the  interstate  commerce  or 
its  regulation  as  to  afford  a  basis  for  congressional  regulation  of  the  intrastate 
activity. 


78  Spp  R.  Davis.  "Weather  Modification  Litigation  and  Statutes'*  in  "Weather  and  Climate 
Modification"  782-783  fed.  W.  IIoss  1074). 
77  See  e.g.,  Schccter  Poultry  Corp.  \.  United  States,  295  U.S.  405  (1935). 


463 


This  same  rationale  was  used  in  Wickard  v.  Filbwm,  317  U.S.  Ill 
(1942),  where  the  Supreme  Court  upheld  Federal  commodity  regula- 
tions which  applied  to  a  farmer  who  was  growing  wheat  for  his  own 
use.  The  Court  concluded  there  that  even  though  this  particular 
amount  of  wheat  was  trivial,  when  combined  with  that  of  others  in 
similar  situations,  it  could  be  sufficiently  competitive  with  wheat  in 
interstate  commerce  to  justify  its  regulation. 

More  recently,  the  Court  in  Perez  v.  United  States,  402  U.S.  146 
(1971),  upheld  title  II  of  the  Consumer  Credit  Protection  Act  which 
prohibited  certain  extortionate  credit  transactions.  The  Court  found 
that  although  the  transactions  in  question  in  this  case  were  purely 
intrastate,  they  could  adversely  affect  interstate  commerce  and  thus 
their  regulation  was  a  permissible  congressional  exercise  of  its  powers 
under  the  commerce  clause. 

As  is  exemplified  by  these  cases,  the  power  of  regulation  given  to 
Congress  under  the  commerce  clause  may  deal  with  the  channels  of 
commerce,  instrumentalities  of  commerce,  activities  affecting  com- 
merce and  articles  of  commerce.  Since  the  devices  used  in  weather 
modification  would  most  likely  involve  commercial  marketing,  it  is 
likely  that  weather  modification  could  be  regulated  since  its  instru- 
ments would  probably  be  in  interstate  commerce.  In  addition,  weather 
modification  activities  could  by  themselves  affect  commerce.  An  even 
stronger  case  could  be  made  that  weather  modification  can  be  reg- 
ulated under  the  commerce  clause  since  it  would  have  an  affect  on  navi- 
gable waters. 

The  commerce  clause  arid  the  regulation  of  navigable  waters. — There 
is  a  line  of  cases  stretching  from  Gibbons  v.  Ogden  concerning  con- 
gressional authority  under  the  commerce  clause  to  regulate  navigable 
waters.  As  was  quoted  above  in  Gibbons  Chief  Justice  Marshall  stated 
that  commerce  "  *  *  *  comprehends  navigation  within  the  limits  of 
every  State  *  *  *."  The  congressional  regulation  of  waterways  was 
further  elaborated  in  Pennsylvania  v.  Wheeling  &  Belmont  Bridge 
Co.,  13  How.  (54  U.S.)  518  (1852),  and  The  Daniel  Ball,  10  Wall 
(77  U.S.)  557  (1871).  As  a  result  of  this  power  over  navigation,  Con- 
gress has  also  acquired  the  right  to  develop  hydroelectric  power  78  and 
to  legislate  in  the  area  of  flood  control.  In  United  States  v.  Appala- 
chian Electric  Potver  Co.,  311  U.S.  377  (1940),  the  Supreme  Court 
discussed  "  *  *  *  the  scope  of  the  Federal  commerce  power  in  relation 
to  conditions  in  licenses,  required  by  the  Federal  Power  Commission, 
for  the  construction  of  hydroelectric  dams  in  navigable  rivers  of  the 
United  States."  At  398.  'Discussing  the  power  of  the  United  States 
over  its  waters,  the  Court  stated : 

,  In  our  view,  it  cannot  properly  be  said  that  the  constitutional  power  of  the 
United  States  over  its  waters  is  limited  to  control  for  navigation.  By  navigation 
respondent  means  no  more  than  operation  of  boats  and  improvement  of  the  water- 
way itself.  In  truth  the  authority  of  the  United  States  is  the  regulation  of  com- 
merce on  is  waters.  Navigability,  in  the  sense  just  stated,  is  but  a  part  of  this 
whole.  Flood  protection,  watershed  development,  recovery  of  the  cost  of  improve- 
ments through  utilization  of  power  are  likewise  parts  of  commerce  control.  As 
respondent  soundly  argues,  the  United  States  cannot  by  calling  a  project  of  its 
own  "a  multiple  purpose  dam"  give  to  itself  additional  powers,  but  equally  truly 


United  States  v.  Chandler-Dunlar  Co.,  229  U.S.  53  (1913). 


464 


the  respondent  cannot,  by  seeking  to  use  a  navigable  waterway  for  power  genera- 
tion alone,  avoid  the  authority  of  the  Government  over  the  stream.  At  426.78 

Since  weather  modification  activities  could  have  an  effect  upon  the 
waterfiow  of  navigable  waters,  they  thereby  would  be  subject  of  con- 
gressional regulation  under  the  commerce  power.  This  is  particularly 
true  in  the  case  of  activities  such  as  cloud  seeding  where  the  activities 
of  weather  modifiers  could  potentially  cause  flooding  and  may  well 
affect  the  watershed. 

Limitations  on  the  commerce  power. — An  argument  could  be  made 
that  Congress  does  not  have  authority  under  the  commerce  clause  to 
regulate  weather  modification  activities.  States  and  localities  could 
argue  that  such  regulation  would  be  an  unconstitutional  infringement 
of  the  rights  of  the  States  under  the  10th  amendment.  In  United  States 
v.  Darby,  312  U.S.  100>  (1941),  the  Supreme  Court  characterized  the 
10th  amendment  as  stating  "*  *  *  but  a  truism  that  all  is  retained  which 
has  not  been  surrendered."  At  124.  This  was  interpreted  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  in  Fry  v.  United  States,  421  U.S.  542  (1975)  : 

While  the  Tenth  Amendment  has  been  characterized  as  a  truism  stating  merely 
that  all  is  retained  which  has  not  been  surrendered,  *  *  *  it  is  not  without  sig- 
nificance. The  Amendment  expressly  declares  the  constitutional  policy  that  Con- 
gress may  not  exercise  power  in  a  fashion  that  impairs  the  States'  integrity  or 
their  ability  to  function  effectively  in  a  federal  system  (citation  omitted). 

The  Supreme  Court  in  National  League  of  Cities  v.  Usery,  426  U.S. 
833  (1976),  quoted  this  language  from  Fry  with  approval.  National 
League  of  Cities  held  that  Congress  may  not  exercise  its  power  to 
regulate  interstate  commerce  so  as  to  force  directly  upon  the  States 
its  choice  as  to  how  essential  decisions  regarding  the  conduct  of  inte- 
gral governmental  functions  are  to  be  made.  More  specifically,  the 
Court  held  that  the  1974  amendments  to  the  Fair  Labor  Standards  Act 
which  extended  the  statutory  minimum  wage  and  maximum  hours 
provisions  to  employees  of  States  and  their  subdivisions  was  unconsti- 
tutional in  that  it  exceeded  congressional  power  under  the  commerce 
clause. 

It  could  be  argued  that  National  League  of  Cities  indicates  that  the 
Supreme  Court  is  placing  limitations  on  the  power  of  Congress  under 
the  commerce  clause  and  that  a  more  narrow  reading  of  this  clause 
would  make  Federal  regulation  of  weather  modification  questionable. 
However,  it  is  unlikely  that  such  an  argument  would  be  successful. 
The  majority  opinion  in  National  League  of  Cities,  despite  its  broad 
language,  did  accommodate  most  of  the  previous  Supreme  Court  cases 
where  broad  congressional  power  to  regulate  commerce  was  upheld.  In 
addition,  the  Court  noted  that  "*  *  *  there  are  attributes  of  sovereign- 
ty attaching  to  every  State  government  which  may  not  be  impaired  by 
Congress  *  *  *"  and  that  "*  *  *  (o)ne  undoubted  attribute  of  State 
sovereignty  is  the  States'  power  to  determine  the  wages  which  shall  be 
paid  to  those  whom  they  employ  *  *  *"'  At  845.  It  is  unlikely  that 
weather  modification  would  be  considered  to  be  one  of  these  undoubted 
attributes  of  State  sovereignty.  It  should  also  be  noted  that  four  jus- 


w  See  also  Douglas  v.  Seacoast  Products,  431  U.S.  26.">  (1977)  where  the  Supreme  Court 
Struck  clown  a  Virginia  statute  which  limited  the  right  of  nonresidents  to  catch  fish  in 
Virginia  waters  since  it  conflicted  with  Federal  requirements.  The  Supreme  Court  stated: 
"While  appellant  may  he  correct  in  arguing  that  at  earlier  times  in  our  history,  there  was 
Bome  flouht  whether  Congress  had  power  under  the  commerce  clause  to  regulate  the  taking 
of  fish  in  State  waters,  there  can  be  no  question  today  that  such  power  exists  where  there 
is  some  effect  on  interstate  commerce."  At  2S1-282  (footnote  omitted). 


4.65 


tices  dissented  from  the  majority  opinion  in  National  League  of  Cities 
and  in  a  concurring  opinion  Justice  Blackmun  stated : 

I  may  misinterpret  the  Court's  opinion,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  it  adopts  a 
balancing  approach,  and  does  not  outlaw  Federal  power  in  areas  such  as  environ- 
mental protection,  where  the  Federal  interest  is  demonstrably  greater  and  ^Yhere 
State  facility  compliance  with  imposed  Federal  standards  would  be  essential. 
At  856. 

An  area  such  as  weather  modification  would  seem  to  be  more  akin  to 
environmental  protection  than  to  minimum  wage  laws.  And  although 
States  have  enacted  legislation  concerning  weather  modification,  the 
fact  that  weather  patterns  often  have  national  effects  would  seem  to 
make  the  imposition  of  Federal  standards  arguably  as  logical  as  they 
are  in  the  area  of  environmental  protection.80 

Fiscal  poioers 

Congress  is  given  the  power  to  tax  and  provide  for  the  general  wel- 
fare of  the  United  States  in  article  I,  section  8,  clause  1  of  the  Consti- 
tution. This  section  specifically  states: 

The  Congress  shall  have  Power  to  lay  and  collect  Taxes,  Duties,  Imposts  and 
Excises,  to  pay  the  Debts  and  provide  for  the  common  Defence  and  general  Wel- 
fare of  the  United  States  *  *  * 

This  power  to  tax  has  been  interpreted  broadly  and  the  Supreme 
Court  has  held  that  the  power  of  Congress  to  tax  to  provide  for  the 
common  welfare  is  not  limited  by  the  other  direct  grants  of  legislative 
power  found  in  the  Constitution.81  However,  although  the  power  of 
Congress  was  not  found  to  be  limited  by  other  direct  grants  in  United 
States  v.  Butler,  the  Supreme  Court  also  indicated  there  that  the  power 
to  tax  for  the  general  welfare  was  limited  by  the  10th  amendment.  The 
limitation  of  the  10th  amendment  on  this  power  was  narrowly  inter- 
preted in  Steward  Machine  Go.  v.  Davis,  301  U.S.  548  (1937).  In  Ste- 
ward, the  Court  upheld  the  Social  Security  Act  and  found  that  the 
relief  of  unemployment  was  a  legitimate  object  of  Federal  expenditure 
under  the  general  welfare  provision. 

Federal  grants-in-aid  wmich  are  conditioned  upon  State  compliance 
with  certain  regulations  have  also  been  found  constitutional.  In  Okla- 
homa  v.  Civil  Service  Commission,  330  U.S.  127  (1947),  the  Supreme 
Court  found  that  section  12(a)  of  the  Hatch  Act  was  constitutional 
and  that  it  did  not  violate  the  10th  amendment  by  diminishing  the 
amount  of  a  Federal  grant-in-aid  for  the  construction  of  highways 
if  the  State  failed  to  remove  a  member  of  the  State  highway  com- 
mission from  office.  The  highway  commissioner  had  been  found  to 
have  taken  an  active  part  in  political  campaigns  while  a  member  of  the 
commission.  In  arriving  at  this  holding,  the  Supreme  Court  stated  : 

While  the  United  States  is  not  concerned  and  has  no  power  to  regulate  local 
political  activities  as  such  of  State  officials,  it  does  have  power  to  fix  the  terms 


80  Numerous  commentators  have  discussed  the  implications  of  National  League  of  Cities. 
For  examples  see.  L.  Tribe.  "Unravelling  National  League  of  Cities  :  The  New  Federalism 
and  Affirmative  Rights  to  Essential  Government  Services."  90  Harv.  L.  Rev.  1065  (1977)  ; 
B.  Matsumoto.  "National  League  of  Cities — From  Footnote  to  Holding — Stnte  Immunity 
from  Commerce  Clause  Regulation."  1977  Ariz.  St.  L.  J.  35  (1977)  ;  Note,  "Constitutional 
Law — 10th  Amendment  as  an  Affirmative  Limitation  on  Commerce  Power,  National  League 
of  Cities  v.  XJsery,  426  U.S.  833  (1976),  8  Toledo  L.  Rev.  796  (1977)  ;  Note,  "The  Re- 
emergence  of  State  Sovereignty  as  a  Limit  on  Congressional  Power  Under  the  Commerce 
Clause."  28  Case  W.  Reserve  L.  Rev.  166  (1977). 

81  United  States  v.  Butler,  297  U.S.  1,  65-66  (1936). 


466 


upon  which  its  money  allotments  to  the  State  shall  be  disbursed.  The  Tenth 
Amendment  does  not  forbid  the  exercise  of  this  power  in  the  way  that  Congress 
has  proceeded  in  this  case  *  *  *  The  end  sought  by  Congress  through  the  Hatch 
Act  is  better  public  service  by  requiring  those  who  administer  funds  for  national 
needs  to  abstain  from  active  political  partisanship.  So  even  though  the  action 
taken  by  Congress  does  have  effect  upon  certain  activities  within  the  State,  it  has 
never  been  thought  that  such  effect  made  the  Federal  act  invalid.  *  *  *  We  do  not 
see  any  violation  of  the  State's  sovereignty  in  the  hearing  or  order.  Oklahoma 
adopted  the  "simple  expedient"  of  not  yielding  to  what  she  urges  is  Federal 
coercion  *  *  *  The  offer  of  benefits  to  a  State  by  the  United  States  dependent 
upon  cooperation  by  the  State  with  Federal  plans,  assumedly  for  the  general 
welfare,  is  not  unusual.  [Citations  omitted.]  At  143-144. 

Given  this  precedent,  it  is  likely  that  Congress  would  be  able  to  con- 
dition grants  for  weather  modification  activities  on  the  following  of 
certain  regulations  without  raising  constitutional  problems.82 

"War  potoers 

The  U.S.  Constitution  article  I,  section  8,  clause  1  provides  in  rele- 
vant part  that  "The  Congress  shall  have  the  Power  To  *  *  *  provide 
for  the  common  defence  *  *  *"  In  addition  clause  11  provides  that 
Congress  shall  have  the  power  to  declare  war.  These  specific  grants  of 
power  have  been  used  by  the  Supreme  Court  to  uphold  certain  con- 
gressional acts.83  The  Supreme  Court  has  also  found  that  there  was  an 
inherent  power  to  make  war.  In  United  States  v.  Curtiss-W  right  Corp., 
299  U.S.  304  (1936) ,  the  Supreme  Court  stated : 

•  *  *  that  the  investment  of  the  Federal  Government  with  the  powers  of  ex- 
ternal sovereignty  did  not  depend  upon  the  affirmative  grants  of  the  Constitution. 
The  power  to  declare  and  wage  war,  to  conclude  peace,  to  make  treaties,  to  main- 
tain diplomatic  relations  with  other  sovereignties,  if  they  had  never  been  men- 
tioned in  the  Constitution,  would  have  vested  in  the  Federal  Government  as  neces- 
sary concomitants  of  nationality.  At  318. 

It  is  likely  that  the  war  power  could  be  used  to  find  congressional 
power  to  regulate  weather  modification  since  weather  modification  has 
potential  military  use.  Also,  Congress  has  used  the  war  power  as  a  basis 
for  the  regulation  of  atomic  energy  and  electricitv.  For  example,  in 
Pauling  v.  McElroy,  164  F.  Supp.  390  (D.D.C.  1958),  aff'd  278  F.  2d 
252  (I960),  cert,  denied,  364  U.S.  835  (1960),  the  district  court  found 
that  the  Atomic  Energy  Act  was  constitutional  and  stated:  "The  Act 
is  a  valid  exercise  of  the  authority  of  Congress  to  promote  and  protect 
the  national  defense  and  safety  under  the  constitutional  war  power." 
At  393.  And  in  Ashwander  v.  Tennessee  Y alley  Authority,  297  U.S.  288 
(1935),  the  Supreme  Court  upheld  the  construction  of  Wilson  Dam  as 
a  valid  exercise  "*  *  *  by  the  Congress  of  its  war  and  commerce 
powers,  that  is.  for  the  purposes  of  national  defense  and  the  improve- 
ment of  navigation.''  At  326. 

Property  power 

Article  TV.  section  3,  clause  2  of  the  Constitution  provides  that  "The 
Congress  shall  have  Power  to  dispose  of  and  make  all  needful  Rules 
and  Regulations  respectinir  the  Territory  or  other  Property  belonging 
to  the  United  States  *  *  *"  This  power  has  been  interpreted  broadly 
and  State  legislation  has  been  held  not  to  interfere  with  the  power  of 

t2  Pot  n  mnrp  rlotnilorl  discussion  of  the  fiscal  power  see  K.  Dam,  "The  American  Fiscal 

Constitution."  44  TJ.  Chi.  L.  Rov.  271  H077). 

■  Sr«.  Lichter  v.  United  States,  334  U.S.  742  (1048). 


467 


Congress  under  this  clause.84  One  of  the  most  recent  pronouncements 
of  the  Supreme  Court  concerning  the  property  power  of  Congress  was 
in  Kleppe  v.  New  Mexico,  426  U.S.  529  (1976) .  In  Kleppe  the  Supreme 
Court  held  that  the  Wild  Free-roaming  Horses  and  Burros  Act  was 
a  constitutional  exercise  of  congressional  power  under  the  property 
clause.  In  arriving  at  this  holding  the  Court  stated : 

*  *  *  the  Clause,  in  broad  terms,  gives  Congress  the  power  to  determine  what 
are  "needful"  rules  "respecting"  the  public  lands  *  *  *  And  while  the  furthest 
reaches  of  the  power  granted  by  the  Property  Clause  have  not  yet  been  defini- 
tively resolved,  we  have  repeatedly  observed  that  "(t)he  power  over  the  public 
land  thus  entrusted  to  Congress  is  without  limitations"  *  *  *  The  decided  cases 
have  supported  this  expansive  reading.  It  is  the  Property  Clause,  for  instance, 
that  provides  the  basis  for  governing  the  Territories  of  the  United  States.  And 
even  over  public  land  within  the  States,  "(t)lie  general  Government  doubtless 
has  a  power  over  its  own  property  analogous  to  the  police  power  of  the  several 
States,  and  the  extent  to  which  it  may  go  in  the  exercise  of  such  power  is  meas- 
ured by  the  exigencies  of  the  particular  case."  [Citations  omitted.]  At  539-540. 

The  property  clause  could  be  used  to  regulate  weather  modification 
over  public  lands.  As  one  commentator  has  stated : 

Superficially  the  power  over  property  might  not  seem  the  most  promising  source 
of  power  to  regulate  weather  modification.  In  the  western  states,  though,  such 
a  high  percentage  of  the  land  area  is  owned  or  controlled  by  the  federal  govern- 
ment that  regulation  of  weather  modification  over  or  affecting  them  would,  in 
many  cases,  effectively  control  weather  modification  in  many  of  the  areas  where 
such  activities  are  apt  to  be  conducted.85 

Treaty  power 

Article  II,  section  2.  clause  2  of  the  Constitution  provides  that  the 
President  "*  *  *  shall  have  Power,  by  and  with  the  consent  of  the  Sen- 
ate, to  make  Treaties,  *  *  *??  Congress  is  often  able  to  enact  legislation 
supplementing  treaties  which  it  may  not  have  the  power  to  reach  other- 
wise. As  one  commentator  has  stated : 

In  a  word,  the  treaty-power  cannot  purport  to  amend  the  Constitution  by  add- 
ing to  the  list  of  Congress'  enumerated  powers,  but  having  acted,  the  consequence 
will  often  be  that  it  has  provided  Congress  with  an  opportunity  to  enact  measures 
which  independently  of  a  treaty  Congress  could  not  pass ;  the  only  question 
fcnat  can  be  raised  as  to  such  measures  will  be  whether  they  are  "necessary  and 
proper"  measures  for  the  carrying  of  the  treaty  in  question  into  operation.86 

It  is  possible,  then,  that  if  a  treaty  concerning  weather  modification 
were  made,  Congress  could  regulate  weather  modification  activities  by 
enacting  legislation  supplementing  the  treaty. 

Conclusion 

The  commerce  clause  as  it  has  been  interpreted  by  the  Supreme 
Court  would  provide  sufficient  authority  for  Congress  to  enact  legisla- 
tion regulating  weather  modification  activities.  Although  the  Supreme 
Court  did  place  certain  limitations  on  the  commerce  clause  in  National 
League  of  Cities,  it  is  unlikely  that  this  case  would  so  limit  the  reach 
of  the  commerce  power  as  to  effect  weather  modification  regulation.  As 
one  commentator  has  noted  "*  *  *  the  potential  of  the  case  may  be 

84  See  Congressional  Research  Service.  "The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  of 
America — Analysis  and  Interpretation"  848  (Washington  1973).  See  also  Kleppe  v.  New 
Mexico,  426  U.S.  529.  546  (1976). 

85  R.  Davis.  "The  Legal  Implications  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Development  and 
Management,"  102  (Report  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  October  1968). 

88  Congressional  Research  Service.  "The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  of  America- 
Analysis  and  Interpretation"  848  (Washington  1973). 


468 


quite  restrained.'- 87  Authority  for  the  regulation  of  weather  modifica- 
tion might  also  be  found  in  other  powers  of  Congress  including  the 
fiscal  power,  war  power,  property  power,  and  treaty  power.  However, 
the  use  of  these  powers  may  not  provide  as  far-reaching  authority  as 
is  given  under  the  commerce  clause.  For  example,  under  the  property 
power,  Congress  would  be  limited  to  regulation  of  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  on  public  lands.  Some  commentators  have  also  argued 
that  the  National  League  of  Cities  decision  may  serve  to  limit  other 
congressional  powers,  such  as  the  fiscal  power,  hi  addition  to  limiting 
the  commerce  power.66  It  is  unlikely  that  even  if  the  National  League 
of  Cities  holding  were  extended  to  other  sources  of  congressional 
power  that  it  would  affect  weather  modification  regulation. 

International* 

The  major  focus  on  the  potential  legal  problems  associated  with 
weatlier  modification  activities  in  the  United  States  has  been  on  the 
domestic  repercussions.  However,  there  is  increasing  attention  and 
interest  in  international  involvement  and  implications.^  The  National 
Weather  xUodification  Policy  Act  of  1976  lJ°  contains  a  congressional 
finding  that:  "Weather  modification  programs  may  have  long-range 
and  unexpected  effects  on  existing  climatic  patterns  which  are  not  con- 
fined by  national  boundaries.*'"  Iwo  of  the  stated  purposes  of  the  act 
are:  "(6)  to  develop  both  national  and  international  mechanisms  de- 
signed to  mhiiniize  conflicts  which  may  arise  with  respect  to  peaceful 
uses  of  weather  modification;  and  (7)  to  integrate  the  results  of  exist- 
ing experience  and  studies  in  weather  modification  activities  into 
model  codes  and  agreements  for  regulation  of  domestic  and  interna- 
tional weather  modification  activities."  The  Secretary  of  Commerce 
is  directed  to  conduct  a  study  which  is  to  include,  among  other  things, 
"  (10)  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  necessity  and  feasibility  of  negotiat- 
ing an  international  agreement  concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of 
weather  modification;  and  (11)  formulation  of  one  or  more  options 
for  a  model  international  agreement  concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of 
weather  modification  activities ;  and  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  neces- 
sity and  feasibility  of  negotiating  such  an  agreement."  Thus,  because 
the  atmospheric  processes  producing  weather  operate  independently  of 
national  boundaries,  weather  modification  is  inherently  an  interna- 
tional problem.91 

Any  international  concern  about  weather  modification  should  in- 
clude attention  to  the  international  legal  issues : 

Serious  international  questions  have  arisen  in  conjunction  with  the  capability 
to  modify  the  weather.  For  example,  do  countries  have  the  right  to  take  uni- 
lateral action  in  all  weather  modification  activities?  What  liability  might  a 
country  incur  for  its  weather  modification  operations  which  destroy  life  and 
property  in  a  foreign  State?  On  what  theory  could  aud  should  that  State  base  its 


*Daniel  Uill  Zafren,  Assistant  Chief,  American  Law  Division,  Congressional  Research 
Sprvice. 

87  Id.  at  S.  10  (Washington  1976). 

88  See  note,  "The  Re-Einergence  of  State  Sovereignty  as  a  Limit  on  Congressional  Power 
Under  the  Commerce  Clause,  '  2S  Case  Western  Reserve  L.  Rev,  106,  19S-199  U977). 

w  See  ch.  10. 

80  15  U.S.C.  |  330  note.  Public  Law  94-490,  90  Stat.  2359. 

"  Note.  -Weather  Modihcation  :  A  Modest  Proposal,'  4  Ga.  J.  of  Infl  &  Comp.  L.  159, 
104  (1974). 


469 


claim?  The  international  ramifications  of  weather  modification  are  obvious,  and 
in  time  may  lead  to  potentially  major  international  controversy.92 

Actually,  some  of  the  international  legal  issues  are  similar  to  those 
in  the  domestic  realm  which  pertain  to  interstate  activities  or  dam- 
ages. Because  of  national  sovereignty  over  airspace,  nations  are  likely 
to  assert  rights  of  control  over  clouds  and  other  weather  phenomena  in 
their  national  airspace.  On  the  one  hand,  this  involves  the  right  to 
"use"  the  weather  over  their  territory.  On  the  other  hand,  it  also  raises 
a  claim  to  "receive"  weather  due  to  arrive  from  another  country.93 

The  domestic  law  concerning  weather  modification  has  been  de- 
scribed herein  as  being  "unsettled."  International  law  governing  this 
subject  is  barely  in  the  formative  stage.  It  is  not  even  clear  at  this 
point  whether  there  will  be  a  separate  particular  body  of  international 
law  on  or  pertaining  to  weather  modification,  or  whether  international 
rules  and  regulations  governing  weather  modification  will  merely 
become  part  of  a  larger  and  more  general  growing  area  of  interna- 
tional law,  namely  international  environmental  law. 

As  an  example  of  an  international  approach  dealing  directly  with 
weather  modification  as  a  separate  consideration,  on  March  26,  1975, 
the  United  States  and  Canada  entered  into  an  agreement  relating  to 
the  exchange  of  information  on  weather  modification  activities 94 
which  recognizes  "the  desirability  of  the  development  of  international 
law  relating  to  weather  modification  activities  that  have  transbound- 
ary  effects."  This  bilateral  agreement,  however,  is  limited  to  unilateral 
reporting  and  consultation.  The  right  to  act  unilaterally  is  preserved, 
and  article  VII  even  states : 

Nothing  herein  relates  to  or  shall  be  construed  to  affect  the  question  of  re- 
sponsibility or  liability  for  weather  modification  activities,  or  to  imply  the  exist- 
ence of  any  generally  applicable  rule  of  international  law. 

As  an  example  of  an  international  approach  which  deals  with 
weather  modification  in  the  broader  concept  of  environment,  on  May 
18.  1977,  the  United  States  signed  the  Convention  on  the  Prohibition 
of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification 
Techniques,95  which  will  enter  into  force  after  ratified  by  20  signatory 
nations,  in  which  each  State  party  "undertakes  not  to  engage  in  mili- 
tary or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques 
having  widespread,  long-lasting,  or  severe  effects  as  the  means  of  de- 
struction, damage  or  injury  to  any  other  State  party." 

The  primary  practical  international  legal  problem  is  probably  that 
of  liability  for  transnational  injury  or  damage.  Such  a  situation  could 
conceivably  arise  involving  the  United  States  either  directly  or  in- 
directly in  a  number  of  general  fact  situations : 

1.  Injury  or  damage  in  another  nation  caused  by  weather  modi- 
fication^ activities  executed  within  the  United  States; 

2.  Injury  or  damage  in  another  nation  caused  by  weather  modi- 
fication activities  executed  in  that  nation  or  a  third  nation  by  the 
United  States  or  a  citizen  of  the  United  States ; 


P2  Comment.  "Wentbpr  Gpnesis  and  Wpnther  Neutralization  :  A  New  Approach  to  Weather 
Modification."  6  Olif.  W.  Tnt'l  L.J.  412.  414  (1976). 

93  Taubenfeld.  "Wentbpr  Modification  and  Control:  Some  International  Implications,"  55 
Calif.  L.  Bev.  493.  497  n 967) . 

p<  TTAS  90r>«  OR  TTST  540. 

P516  Int'l  Materials  S8  (1977).  It  has  been  submitted  by  the  President  to  the  Senate 
for  approval.  See  Exec.  K,  95th  Cong.,  2d  sess. 


470 


,3.  Injury  or  damage  in  another  nation  caused  by  weather  modi- 
fication activities  executed  in  an  area  not  subject  to  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  any  nation  (e.g.,  over  the  high  seas),  by  the  United  States 
or  a  citizen  thereof ;  and 

4.  Injury  or  damage  to  an  alien  or  an  alien's  property  within  the 
United  States  caused  by  weather  modification  activities  executed 
within  the  United  States. 
Different  and  highly  complex  legal  considerations  might  be  present 
with  any  one  (or  combination)  of  such  variable  factors  as: 

1.  The  purpose  and  motivation  of  the  weather  modification  activity : 

(a)  Was  it  performed  for  peaceful  or  hostile  purposes? 

(b)  Was  it  originated  for  some  public  interest  or  a  private 
interest  ? 

2.  The  authority  and  character  of  the  weather  modifier: 

(a)  Is  the  weather  modifier  a  Federal  or  State  governmental 
agency,  a  private  party  under  contract  from  the  Federal  or  a 
State  government,  or  a  private  party  engaged  in  a  private 
pursuit  ? 

(b)  Has  the  modifier  complied  with  all  necessary  prerequisites 
surrounding  that  particular  activity  (e.g.,  license,  notification, 
and  environmental  impact  statement  )  ? 

(c)  Has  the  other  nation  consented  to  or  requested  the  weather 
modification  ? 

(d)  Has  the  weather  modifier  acted  pursuant  to  the  authority 
granted  and  in  a  competent  and  acceptable  manner  ? 

3.  The  forum  chosen  for  commencement  of  any  legal  action,  and  the 
defendant(s)  chosen: 

(a)  Does  the  plaintiff  have  standing  to  bring  such  a  suit  ? 

(b)  Does  the  forum  recognize  a  cause  of  action  upon  which  the 
suit  might  be  brought  ? 

(e)  Is  proper  jurisdiction  obtained  over  the  defendant  (s)  ? 

(d)  If  suit  is  brought  against  a  governmental  entity,  is  a  de- 
fense of  sovereign  immunity  available? 

(e)  If  suit  is  brought  in  a  foreign  nation  and  judgment  ob- 
tained, can  or  would  it  be  recognized  and  enforceable  in  the 
United  States? 

(/)  What  are  the  conflicts  of  law  decisions  of  the  forum  ? 

4.  The  type  and  extent  of  injury  or  damage  sustained : 

(a)  Can  it  be  proven  that  the  weather  modification  activity 
caused  the  injury  or  damage  complained  of  ? 

(b)  Is  the  injury  or  damage  slight  compared  with  any  benefits 
resulting  from  the  activity? 

(c)  Can  any  of  the  injury  or  damage  have  been  avoided  or 
foreseen,  by  either  party? 

(d)  What  legal  analogies  can  be  drawn  ? 

This  listing  is  not  exhaustive,  but  it  is  readily  apparent  that  legal 
considerations  can  vary  drastically  depending  on  the  facts  and  circum- 
stances surrounding  any  particular  incident  and  questions  pertaining 
to  legal  liability  therefor.  Following  is  a  brief  description  of  some  of 
the  international  law  principles  that  might  arise,  both  public  and 
private,  in  any  given  situation. 


471 


CERTAIN  HOSTILE  USES  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ARE  PROHIBITED 

Besides  the  prohibition  against  the  use  of  environmental  modifica- 
tion techniques  contained  in  the  Convention  on  the  Prohibition  of  Mili- 
tary or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification  Tech- 
niques as  to  the  military  or  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modifi- 
cation techniques  having  widespread,  long-lasting  or  severe  effects  in 
another  nation  which  is  a  party  to  that  Convention,  other  sources  of  in- 
ternational law  can  be  pointed  to  as  declaring  similar  principles.  For 
example,  the  International  Committee  of  the  Red  Cross  Protocol  II 
after  the  Second  Diplomatic  Conference  of  the  Reaffirmation  and  De- 
velopment of  International  Humanitarian  Law  Applicable  in  Armed 
Conflicts,  protects  the  natural  environment  from  combat  methods  that 
cause  widespread,  long-term  and  severe  damage.  Article  28  states :  "It 
is  forbidden  to  employ  methods  or  means  of  combat  which  are  intended 
or  may  be  expected  to  cause  widespread,  long-term  and  severe  damage 
to  the  natural  environment."  96  Extreme  forms  of  weather  modifica- 
tion, if  used  as  a  weapon,  could  arguably  also  be  in  contravention  of  the 
"laws  of  war"  as  being  in  contravention  of  the  principles  of  military 
necessity,  humanity,  proportionality,  and  discrimination. 

NATIONS  ARE  RESPONSIBLE  FOR  ENVIRONMENTAL  CONDUCT  WHICH  CAUSES 
INJURY  OR  DAMAGE  IN  OR  TO  OTHER  NATIONS 

On  the  issue  of  liability,  a  continuous  flow  of  international  decisions, 
conventions,  and  practices  indicates  acceptance  of  a  standard  of  strict 
liability  among  states  for  damage  caused  by  or  deprivations  resulting 
from  manipulation  of  environmental  variables.  This  standard  has  been 
developed  by  extension  of  three  well-known  cases :  The  Trail  Smelter 
arbitration,  in  which  an  international  tribunal  found  Canada  liable  for 
fumes  emanating  from  a  smelter  located  in  British  Columbia  and  do- 
ing damage  in  the  State  of  Washington ;  the  Corfu,  Channel  case,  in 
which  the  International  Court  of  Justice  held  Albania  responsible 
under  international  law  for  damage  to  British  ships  from  mine  explo- 
sions in  Albanian  territorial  waters ;  and  the  Lac  Lannoux  arbitration, 
where  it  was  said  that  France  would  be  strictly  liable  if,  due  to  its  hy- 
droelectric utilization  of  a  French  lake,  damage  resulted  to  waters 
draining  into  Spain.  Strict  liability  among  states  has  similarly  found 
expression  in  several  multilateral  conventions.  Such  liability  has  usu- 
ally been  enforced  in  the  first  instance  by  and  against  states,  leaving 
to  national  legal  systems  its  assertion  directly  against  private  parties.97 

The  Trail  Smelter  case  contains  the  following  often-quoted 
language : 

Under  principles  of  international  law,  as  well  as  of  the  law  of  the  United  States, 
no  State  has  the  right  to  use  or  permit  the  use  of  its  territory  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  cause  injury  by  fumes  in  or  to  the  territory  of  another  or  the  properties  or 
persons  therein,  when  the  case  is  of  serious  consequence  and  the  injury  is  estab- 
lished by  clear  and  convincing  evidence."  99 


98  Cantrell,  "Civilian  Protection  in  Internal  Armed  Conflicts :  The  Second  Diplomatic 
Conference."  11  Texas  Int'l  L.J.  305.  308.  326-327  (1976). 

97  Note.  "New  Perspectives  on  International  Environmental  Law."  82  Yale  L..T.  1059. 
1665-1666  (1073).  The  Trail  Smelter  case  (United  States  v.  Canada),  3  TT.N.R.I.A. A.  1038 
(1041).  35  Am.  J.  Int'l  L.  684  (1041).  The  Corfu  Channel  case.  T10401  I.C.J.4.  The  Lake 
Lannoux  case.  12  U.N.R.I.A.A.  281  (1057),  52  Am.  J.  Int'l  L.  156  (1050). 

9S  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  there  is  commentary  to  the  effect  that  the  implica- 
tions of  this  case  are  not  as  they  seem  to  be.  See.  Nanda,  "The  Establishment  of  Interna- 
tional Standards  for  Transnational  Injury,"  60  Iowa  L.  Rev.  1080,  1007  (1075). 


472 


Further  diplomatic  exchanges  over  incidents  such  as  compensation 
paid  by  the  United  States  for  the  Japanese  fishermen  subject  to  exces- 
sive radiation  in  the  1954  hydrogen  bomb  tests  in  the  Marshall  Island 
Trust  Territories,  the  exchange  of  notes  between  Japan  and  the  United 
States  involving  the  1958  U.S.  Pacific  nuclear  tests,  and  the  exchange 
of  notes  between  Mexico  and  the  United  States  involving  pollution  of 
Ciudad  Juarez,  Chihuahua,  Mexico,  have  been  pointed  to  as  effectively 
extending  the  doctrine  of  state  responsibility  set  forth  in  the  Trail 
Smelter  case."  One  recent  commentator  describes  this  as  an  unformu- 
lated principle  in  international  law  that  is  called  the  "principle  of 
neighborship."  "It  is  clear,  once  we  formulate  it,  that  the  principle  does 
impose  limitations  on  a  state's  right  to  adversely  affect  the  territorial 
sovereignty  of  its  neighbors  by  acts  carried  out  in  its  own  territory.1 

NATIONS  ARE  LIABLE  FOR  INJURIES  SUSTAINED  BY  ALIENS  WITHIN  THEIR 
TERRITORY  CAUSED  BY  TORTIOUS  CONDUCT  IN  VIOLATION  OF  INTERNA- 
TIONAL LAW 

"A  state  is  responsible  under  international  law  for  injury  to  an 
alien  caused  by  conduct  subject  to  its  jurisdiction,  that  is  attributable 
to  the  state  and  wrongful  under  international  law."  2  If  the  conduct 
is  not  wrongful  under  international  law,  the  alien  would  in  most  in- 
stances have  the  same  remedies  and  recourse  as  those  available  to  citi- 
zens of  the  United  States,3  and  be  subject  to  the  same  defenses.4 

NATIONS  OR  ITS  CITIZENS  MAY  BE  LIABLE  FOR  INJURY  AND  DAMAGE  THEY 
CAUSED  TO  CITIZENS  OF  ANOTHER  NATION  OCCURRING  IN  THAT  NATION 

If  the  citizen  of  the  foreign  nation  is  injured  in  that  nation  by  torti- 
ous conduct  attributable  to  the  United  States  or  one  of  its  citizens,  the 
injured  party  would  have  the  option  of  bringing  a  cause  of  action 
within  that  country  if  jurisdiction  can  be  obtained  and  such  a  suit  is 
permitted  there,  or  by  bringing  suit  within  the  United  States  in  an  ap- 
propriate forum.  Private  litigation  between  citizens  of  two  different 
nations  can  produce  a  host  of  legal  issues.  For  example,  a  conflicts  of 
law  problem  would  arise  in  that  the  tribunal  called  upon  to  determine 
the  matter  would  have  to  choose  which  nation's  laws  (or  political  sub- 
division thereof )  would  apply  to  the  situation.5  If  the  litigation  in- 
volved a  citizen  of  another  nation  and  the  United  States,  local  law 


w  Nanda,  "The  Establishment  of  International  Standards  for  Transnational  Injury,"  60 
Iowa  L.  Rev.  10S9.  1098-1100  (1975). 

1  Elkind,  "Footnote  to  the  Nuclear  Test  Cases  :  Abuse  of  Right — A  Blind  Alley  for  En- 
vironmentalists," 9  Vand.  J.  Transnational  L.  57  (1976).  This  same  commentator  criticizes 
the  International  Court  of  Justice  for  sidestepping  the  necessity  of  deciding  whether  nu- 
clear resting  which  causes  fallout  on  neighboring  territory  is  lawful  in  the  1975  nuclear 
test  cases  (Australia  v.  France,  New  Zealand  v.  France). 

2  Restatement  (second)  of  the  Law  "Foreign  Relations  Law  of  the  United  States,"  sec. 
164<1  t  (19.-1). 

»42  T\S.C.  sec.  1981  (1970  ed.)  grants  all  persons  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United 
States  the  right  to  sue.  Treaties  of  friendship,  commerce  and  navigation,  usually  also  grant 
such  a  ripht.  For  example,  see  the  Treatv  of  Friendship,  Commerce  and  Navigation  Between 
the  United  states  and  Japan  (1953),  4  U.S.T.  2083. 

4  If  a  United  States  citizen  would  be  foreclosed  from  pursuing  a  claim  for  damages  be- 
cause of  the  defense  of  sovereign  immunity,  as  an  example,  an  alien  would  likewise  be 
bn  rred. 

«  See,  e.g.,  S.  C.  McCaffrey,  "Pollution  Suits  Between  Citizens  of  the  Republic  of  Mexico 
ami  the  United  States  :  A  Study  in  Private  International  Law"  (1976),  at  34-35,  106. 


473 


would  probably  be  determinative.  "Generally,  international  law  gov- 
erns the  relations  of  sovereign  states.  Therefore,  private  parties  have 
no  standing  to  espouse  a  claim  in  the  international  system.  Usually, 
the  only  direct  recourse  for  an  injured  private  party  against  a  foreign 
nation  is  through  that  nation's  municipal  law.  If  no  satisfaction  can  be 
obtained  in  local  courts,  then  only  the  nation  of  the  injured  party  may 
demand  redress  by  the  foreign  nation  for  any  alleged  violation  of  its 
duty  under  international  law.r  6 


6  Comment,  "State  Responsibility  to  Espouse  Claims  of  Nationals  Based  on  Contracts 
With  Foreign  Nations,"  2  N.C.J.  Int'l  &  Comm.  Reg.  38,  39  (1977). 


CHAPTER  12 


ECONOMIC  ASPECTS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

<By  Warren  Yiessman,  Jr.,  Senior  Specialist  in  Engineering-  and  Public  Works, 
Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

Several  weather  modification  processes  have  economic  implications 
of  great  significance.  Many  sectors  of  agriculture,  industry,  and  com- 
merce may  reap  benefits  or  sustain  losses  as  a  result  of  shifts  from  his- 
toric weather  trends.  The  difficulty  is  that  until  the  technology  is  more 
highly  developed  and  control  systems  perfected  to  permit  reliable  pre- 
dictions of  outcomes,  attempts  to  quantify  benefits  and  costs  will,  in 
many  cases,  be  more  academic  than  practical. 

The  long-term  potential  for  economic  gains  through  weather  modi- 
fication cannot  be  denied.  For  example,  studies  sponsored  by  the  Bureau 
of  Reclamation  (11)73)  of  the  potential  increase  in  water  supply  from 
operational  weather  modification  in  the  Upper  Missouri  River  Basin 
indicate  that  seeding  winter  orographic  storms  in  headwater  areas 
could  provide  as  much  as  1.8  million  acre-feet  of  new  water  annually.1 
In  the  Yellowstone  subbasin,  the  estimated  potential  is  536,000  acre- 
feet  per  year.  Table  1  summarizes  results  of  the  study.  These  estimates 
are  based  on  an  assumed  October-through- April  cloud-seeding  period. 
If  seeding  were  extended  through  May  and  early  June,  a  further  incre- 
ment of  20  to  25  percent  could  become  available  provided  that  May- 
June  precipitation  is  increased  in  proportion  to  October- April  pre- 
cipitation. The  cost  of  providing  this  new  water  is  estimated  to  be  $2.50 
per  acre-foot.2 


1  U.S.  Department  of  Interior.  Water  for  Management  Team,  "Report  on  Water  for  Energy 
in  the  Northern  Great  Plains  Area  with  Emphasis  on  the  Yellowstone  River  Basin,"  Wash- 
ington. D.C.,  January  197o. 

2  Ibid. 

(475) 


476 


TABLE  1— POTENTIAL  ADDITIONAL  WATER  TO  THE  UPPER  MISSOURI  BASIN  BY  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 


Weather  modification 

Average  — 

Drainage 

annual 

Area 

Incremental 

area 

runoff 

affected 

runoff 

(square 

(1,000 

(1,000 

miles) 

acre-ft) 

miles) 

acre-ft) 

Upper  Missouri  tributaries: 

Milk  River  at  Milk  River,  Alberta 

1  036 

278 

157 

I 

Marias  River  near  Shelby 

3  242 

728 

491 

74 

Teton  River  near  Dalton 

1  308 

118 

212 

22 

Sun  River  near  Vaughn  

1,854 

579 

736 

85 

3,  663 

9,  973 

767 

Rnhtatal 

954 

Yellowstone: 

Yellowstone  River  at  Billings  

11,795 

5,311 

5,161 

536 

Wind  River  at  Boysen  Reservoir  

7,  701 

997 

1,964 

126 

Greybull  River  at  Meeteetse  

681 

237 

512 

46 

1,538 

797 

1,501 

126 

Subtotal  

834 

Other  

49 

Total,  Upper  Missouri  (above  Sioux  City,  Iowa)   1, 837 


Source  of  data:  "Twelve  Basin  Investigation,"  prepared  for  USBR  by  North  American  Weather  Consultants,  vol.  I, 
Dec.  31, 1973. 

The  nature  of  direct  benefits  from  increased  precipitation  is 
obvious,  but  many  indirect  benefits  and  costs  are  more  elusive  and  sug- 
gest that  further  study  of  the  sociological,  legal,  and  environmental  im- 
plications of  weather  modification  is  needed  and  should  be  accelerated. 

Economic  Setting 

To  place  the  economic  aspects  of  weather  modification  in  better  per- 
spective, a  review  of  the  operational  status  of  the  principal  modification 
processes  will  be  useful : 3 

1.  Dispersion  of  cold  fog  and  seeding  of  winter  orographic  storms  al- 
ready have  limited  operational  capability. 

2.  Dispersal  of  warm  fog,  modification  of  precipitation  from  con- 
vective  systems,  and  hail  suppression  are  on  the  threshold  of  opera- 
tional capability. 

3.  [Modification  of  major  storm  systems  to  minimize  damage  from 
wind  and  flooding,  lightning  suppression,  and  modification  of  torna- 
does are  currently  hopes  for  the  future. 

Considering  the  state  of  the  art  as  summarized  above,  it  is  not  difficult 
to  realize  the  tenuity  of  conclusive  economic  analyses. 

Constraints  on  reliable  quantification  of  benefits  and  costs  associated 
with  weather  modification  practices  are  related  not  only  to  the  present 
uncertainty  of  technology  but  also  to  the  complex  nature  of  legal  and 
economic  aspects  of  externality  problems.4' 5  For  example,  decisions  re-j 
garding  the  development  of  facilities  to  enhance  agricultural  produc- 
tion through  more  efficient  use  of  water  on  one's  own  land  are  essen- 
tially independent  of  imposing  costs  on  others  or  on  bestowing  benefits 


8  Crutchfield.  James  A..  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential."  draft  of  papej 
prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Dnfj 
verslty  of  Washington.  Seattle.  Wash.,  May  1977. 

*  Lackner,  T.  ()..  et  al„  "Precipitation  Modification,"  National  Technical  Information 
Service,  PB  201534,  Springfield,  Va.,  July  1071.  pp.  vill-l  to  VIII-14. 

*  Fleagle,  R.  O.,  "Weather  Modification — Science  and  Public  Policy,"  University  of  Wash- 
ington Press,  Seattle,  Wash.,  1978,  pp.  31-40. 


477 


on  others  for  which  there  is  no  return.  Counter  to  this  is  the  situation 
wherein  weather  modification  is  employed  as  the  vehicle  for  such  im- 
provement. In  this  case,  increased  precipitation  could  benefit  farmers 
not  sharing  in  payment  for  the  program  but  impose  hardships  and 
costs  on  others.  For  example,  more  rainy  days  would  be  detrimental  to 
operators  of  outdoor  recreational  facilities.  Considering  this,  it  is  ap- 
parent that  collective  action  will  be  required  for  effective  weather 
modification.  Unfortunately,  development  of  the  appropriate  institu- 
tions and  laws,  and  clarification  of  legal  liability  issues,  will  likely  be 
a  slow  process,  requiring  an  unusual  degree  of  cooperation  and  public- 
spirited  effort. 

Finally,  it  should  be  recognized  that  weather  modification  benefits 
are  bounded  by  the  cost  of  achieving  the  same  objectives  with  the  "next 
best"  alternative.6  For  example,  crop  yields  could  be  increased  through 
the  importation  of  water  to  deficient  areas,  modified  use  of  agricultural 
chemicals,  or  use  of  improved  plant  varieties. 

The  following  sections  present  a  summary  of  the  economic  aspects 
of  weather  modification  procedures,  a  review  of  methodology  for  eco- 
nomic analyses,  and  a  discussion  of  case  studies  of  the  benefits  and 
costs  of  several  operational  programs. 

Economic  Aspects  of  Weather  Modification  Procedures 
fog  dispersal 

The  impact  of  adverse  weather  conditions  on  transportation  systems 
is  well  known.  Of  particular  significance  is  fog.  About  97  percent  of  all 
scheduled  airline  nights  are  completed  each  year,  but  of  the  remain- 
ing 3  percent  about  one-half  are  canceled  because  of  fog.  The  percent- 
age is  small,  but  as  noted  by  Beckwith  7  the  cost  is  very  large.  He  points 
out  that  during  1964,  more  than  800  million  airline-miles  were  flown 
in  the  United  States  and  that  gross  revenues  generated  during  that 
period  totaled  $4.25  billion. 

At  present,  seeding  of  cold  fog  at  temperatures  below  freezing  is  an 
operational  technology.  This  procedure  is  used  at  numerous  civilian 
and  military  airports,  and  shows  net  benefits  of  magnitude  significant 
enough  to  permit  its  undertaking  by  private  firms  and  local  govern- 
ments. According  to  the  Interdepartmental  Committee  for  Atmos- 
pheric Sciences,  cold  fog  dissipation  programs  at  several  airports  have 
shown  benefit-cost  ratios  of  more  than  5  to  1  savings  in  delayed  or 
diverted  traffic.8 

Unfortunately,  cold  fogs  constitute  only  about  5  percent  of  the  eco- 
nomically disruptive  fogs  which  occur  in  the  United  States.  The  Air- 
line Transport  Association  estimates  that  elimination  of  delays  due  to 
warm  fogs  would  result  in  annual  savings  of  $75  million  at  1971  prices. 


8  Crutchfield.  James  A.,  ''Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential."  draft  of  paper 
prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Uni- 
versity of  Washington,  Seattle.  Wash..  May  1977. 

7  Beckwith.  W.  B..  1966*  "Impacts  of  Weather  on  the  Airline  Industry  :  the  Value  of  Fos: 
Dispersal  Programs,"  in :  Sewell,  W.  R.  D.,  ed.,  1966.  "Human  Dimensions  of  Weather 
Modification"  University  of  Chicago,  Department  of  Geographv,  research  paper  No.  105, 
pp.  195-207.  • 

s  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technologv.  "A  National  Program  for  Accelerating 
Progress  in  Weather  Modification,"  ICAS  Rept.  No.  15a,  Executive  Office  of  the  President, 
June  1971. 

34-857—79  33 


478 


In  addition,  about  $300  million  in  losses  are  incurred  by  fog-associated 
vehicle  accidents  on  the  Nation's  highways.  Little  more  needs  to  be  said 
to  indicate  the  payoff  which  could  result  from  further  advances  in 
warm  fog  dispersal  programs.  Fortunately,  although  reliable  opera- 
tional technology  for  warm  fog  dissipation  does  not  yet  exist,  it  ap- 
pears that  the  technical  problems  are  manageable  and  that  successful 
procedures  are  not  too  far  from  development. 

PRECIPITATION  AUGMENTATION 

The  economic  potential  of  precipitation  augmentation  through  seed- 
ing operations  is  great.  In  areas  of  or  during  periods  of  marginal  pre- 
cipitation, increases  of  only  a  few  percent  might  mean  the  difference 
between  a  plentiful  crop  and  complete  failure. 

Orographic  cloud  seeding 

The  Interdepartmental  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences  has  re- 
ported that  irrigation  benefits  of  $50  per  acre-foot  per  year  can  be  gen- 
erated by  snowpack  augmentation  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin.9  On 
the  basis  of  a  15-percent  increase  in  snowpack  due  to  seeding,  it  is  esti- 
mated that  about  2  million  additional  acre-feet  of  water  per  year  could 
be  generated  at  a  cost  of  about  $1.50  per  acre-foot.  Other  economic 
benefits  such  as  increased  hydroelectric  power  and  salinity  control 
would  also  result. 

By  1977,  the  scientific  community  generally  supported  the  thesis 
that  operational  capability  for  seeding  winter  orographic  clouds  to 
produce  increased  precipitation  on  the  order  of  10  to  20  percent  had 
been  achieved.  Arguments  now  relate  mostly  to  unknowns  regarding 
individual  seeding  performances  and  the  separation  of  seeding  effects 
from  natural  occurrences. 

The  economic  gains  from  seeding  orographic  clouds  can  be  signifi- 
cant, especially  when  facilities  already  exist  for  storing  and  distribut- 
ing the  increased  flows  which  result.  Studies  in  California  and  Colorado 
suggest  that  benefits  from  snowpack  augmentation  exceed  costs.  Re- 
garding the  Colorado  experience,  Weisbecker  said.10  "On  this  basis, 
it  appears  that  the  benefits  of  an  operational  program  could  exceed  the 
sum  of  the  direct  costs  and  the  indirect  costs  to  the  areas  of  origin  in 
the  upper  basin." 

Connective  cloud  seeding 

From  a  national  viewpoint,  the  potential  for  economic  gains  through 
the  ability  to  increase  precipitation  from  convective  cloud  systems  i.s  of 
far  greater  consequence  than  that  from  orographic  storms.  Un for- 
tunately, operative  capability  in  this  area  has  not  yet  been  achieved. 
A  (  cording  to  Crutchfield  : 11 

Operational  procedures  for  using  these  very  large  potential  atmospheric  re- 
sources still  await  the  development  of  more  complete  scientific  understanding  and 


8  Ibid. 

10  Weisbecker.  Leo  W.,  "Technology  Assessment  of  Winter  Orographic  Snowpack  Aug- 
mentation in  the  Upper  Colorado  River  Basin."  summary  report,  Stanford  Research  Insti- 
tute. Menlo  Park,  Calif.,  May  1972.  pp.  13-19. 

u  Crutchfield.  James  A.,  "Weather  Modification  :  Tbe  Economic  Potential."  draft  of 
paper  prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce, 
University  of  Washington,  Seattle.  Wash..  May  1977. 


479 


the  capacity  to  model  convective  systems  in  ways  that  will  indicate  appropriate 
points  of  attack  for  enhancement  or  inhibition  of  precipitation. 

The  possibility  must  not  be  ruled  out  that  subsequent  research  may  suggest 
that  convective  clouds  are  simply  not  amenable  to  controlled  modification ;  a  con- 
clusion which  would  be  discouraging  but  still  economically  useful  in  itself.  More 
hopeful,  and  more  likely,  is  the  prospect  of  developing  enough  predictive  capabil- 
ity to  generate  rules  of  thumb  about  effectiveness  of  seeding  operations.  Then, 
and  only  then,  will  farmers  change  their  techniques  to  take  full  economic  ad- 
vantage of  the  additional  water. 

What  makes  the  potential  gains  from  convective  system  seeding  so 
attractive  is  the  fact  that  these  storms  are  widely  distributed  geo- 
graphically and  they  influence  grain  producing  areas  of  national  and 
international  significance.  Crutchfield  notes  that  if  precipitation  were 
increased  in  the  semiarid  high-plains  States  by  2  or  3  percent,  the  costs 
of  operating  a  precipitation  augmentation  program  would  be  easily 
covered.12 

Since  limited  experience  upon  which  meaningful  economic  Analyses 
of  benefits  from  modification  of  convective  storm  systems  exists,  only 
crude  estimates  are  available.  Nevertheless,  it  appears  that  if  opera- 
tional programs  were  in  effect  in  North  America,  Europe,  Australia 
and  the  U.S.S.R.,  wheat  production  in  these  areas  might  be  increased 
by  as  much  as  5  percent.13  This  is  very  significant  since  wheat  produc- 
tion increases  in  the  range  of  3  to  8  percent  would  meet  normal  import 
requirements  of  a  large  part  of  the  nonwheat  producing  regions  of  the 
world.14  The  foregoing  projections  are  based  on  an  increase  in  pre- 
cipitation on  the  order  of  10  percent,  but  this  might  be  overly  optimis- 
tic since  most  atmospheric  scientists  believe  increases  of  3  to  5  percent 
would  be  a  major  breakthrough. 

Of  considerable  interest  is  the  production  of  additional  water  during 
periods  of  drought.  This  would  have  significant  economic  payoff.  The 
problem,  however,  is  that  weather  modification  depends  on  the  avail- 
ability of  moisture  in  the  atmosphere  and  is  therefore  more  likely  to 
increase  jDrecipitation  during  periods  that  would  normally  be  wet.  The 
atmospheric  conditions  associated  with  prolonged  droughts  are  any- 
thing but  conducive  to  outstanding  successes  for  weather  modification 
programs.  A  corollary  is  that  the  instability  of  agricultural  output  due 
to  weather  variations  might  be  increased  through  weather  modification 
practices  and  this  should  be  recognized. 

Precipitation  augmentation  and  energy  considerations 

Additional  water  supplies  developed  through  precipitation  augmen- 
tation will  have  little  direct  impact  on  most  energy  issues  although 
small  increments  of  hydroelectric  power  will  result.  The  most  signifi- 
cant area  of  energy-water  interaction,  in  which  augmented  water  sup- 
plies could  play  an  important  role,  is  related  to  coal  and  oil  shale 
development  in  the  northern  Great  Plains  and  Western  United  States. 
In  these  semiarid  regions,  the  incremental  development  of  water  could 
be  of  an  order  of  magnitude  significant  enough  to  resolve  conflicts 
between  major  water  uses — namely  energy  resource  development  and 


12  Crutchfield.  James  A.,  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential,"  draft  of  paper 
prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Uni- 
versity of  Washington,  Seattle,  Wash.,  May  1977. 

"  Ihid. 

«  Ibid. 


480 


irrigated  agriculture.  Comments  on  the  Missouri  Kiver  Basin  given  in 
the  introduction  address  this  issue. 

HAIL  SUPPRESSION 

The  economic  importance  of  hail  suppression  ranks  second  only  to 
precipitation  augmentation  in  terms  of  significance  to  agricultural 
production.  Average  annual  losses  from  hail  total  about  $500  million 
in  the  United  States.  Most  of  the  damage  occurs  in  the  Great  Plains 
and  in  Midwestern  and  Southwestern  States. 

While  rapid  progress  in  hail  suppression  technology  has  been  made 
in  recent  years,  a  National  Hail  Research  Experiment,  funded  by  NSF 
and  conducted  by  the  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research,  could 
not  find  conclusive  evidence  that  reduction  in  hail  damage  was  actually 
achieved  in  target  areas.15  On  the  other  hand,  the  Interdepartmental 
Committee  for  Atmospheric  Sciences  reported  in  1971  that  in  one  area 
of  the  North  Caucasus  of  the  Soviet  Union,  hail  suppression  had  been 
operational  for  more  than  5  years.16  It  noted  that  the  value  of  crops 
saved  exceeded  the  costs  of  the  program  by  a  factor  of  10  or  more. 

The  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research  indicates  a  break- 
even point  of  about  10  percent  effectiveness  in  the  Great  Plains.  In  the 
East,  a  higher  percentage  reduction  of  hail  would  be  necessary  for 
cost-effectiveness  since  hail  damages  are  less.  Crutchfield  states  that  at 
a  25-percent  reduction  level  (about  the  best  to  be  expected),  wheat 
yields  in  the  United  States  might  be  increased  by  1  percent 17  but  this 
might  be  low  since  research  indicates  that  hail-suppression  techniques 
also  tend  to  increase  total  precipitation. 

LIGHTNING  SUPPRESSION  AND  REDUCTION  IN  STORM  DAMAGE 

More  distant  in  terms  of  operational  capability  (in  some  cases  this 
may  never  be  achieved)  are  procedures  for  suppressing  lightning  and 
modifying  damages  from  major  storms. 

Although  average  annual  losses  of  $100  million  from  lightning- 
caused  fires  appear  to  make  the  economics  of  lightning  suppression 
attractive,  there  is  a  growing  opinion  within  the  U.S.  Forest  Service 
and  among  professional  foresters  that  naturally  occurring  forest  fires 
are  not  as  detrimental  to  long-term  net  forest  yields  as  had  been  previ- 
ously thought.18  In  any  event,  the  technology  of  lightning  suppres- 
sion is  not  yet  at  operational  readiness  and  the  economic  implications 
are  clouded. 

Loss  of  hundreds  of  lives  and  damages  totaling  billions  of  dollars 
are  incurred  annually  as  a  result  of  major  storms.19  This  makes  the 
prospect  of  modifying  such  systems  very  attractive.  At  present,  how- 
ever, the  knowledge  of  storm  processes  and  mechanics  of  alteration 

15  Crutchfield,  James  A.,  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential,"  draft  of  paper 
prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Univer- 
sity of  Washington,  Seattle,  Wash..  May  1977; 

18  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology,  "A  National  Program  for  Accelerating 
Progress  in  Weather  Modification,"  ICAS  Kept.  No.  15a,  Executive  Office  of  the  President, 
June  1971. 

17  Crutchfield,  James  A.,  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential,"  draft  of  paper 
prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Univer- 
sity of  Washington,  Seattle.  Wash.,  May  1977. 

18  Crutchfield,  James  A..  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential."  draft  of  paper 
prepared  Cor  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Univer- 
sity of  Washington,  Seattle,  Wash.,  May  1977. 

19  Ibid. 


481 


are  not  adequately  understood  and,  as  a  result,  meaningful  assessment 
of  potential  economic  benefits  is  not  possible.  The  concept  that  the 
major  portion  of  current  damages  might  be  eliminated  if  successful 
modification  of  storm  characteristics  (such  as  wind  velocities)  could 
be  achieved  is  misleading.  Until  the  side  effects  of  changing  large 
storm  systems  such  as  hurricanes  are  known,  the  benefits  to  be 
achieved  will  elude  identification.  Modification  of  wind  velocities,  for 
example,  might  cause  increases  in  damaging  rainfall  or  shifts  in  re- 
gional distribution  of  precipitation. 

The  dangers  inherent  in  tampering  with  major  storm  systems,  on 
the  basis  of  incomplete  understanding  of  such  S}rstems,  are  pointed  out 
in  the  following  statement  by  Crutchfield  : 20 

The  first  tentative  experiments  in  hurricane  seeding — limited  to  four  storms — 
only  nibbled  at  the  edges  of  the  scientific  problems  involved,  though  the  results 
were  certainly  interesting  enough  to  suggest  an  expanded  effort.  But  an  attempt 
to  transfer  the  program  to  the  Pacific  Ocean  where  larger  numbers  of  storms 
more  remote  from  populated  areas  could  be  used  for  experimental  purposes 
brought  such  vigorous  objections  from  Japan  and  China  that  the  program  was 
halted.  One  can  only  contemplate  with  awe  the  wrangling  that  would  develop 
if  demonstrably  workable  procedures  to  reduce  peak  velocities  in  storms  affect- 
ing the  continental  United  States  were  alleged — correctly  or  incorrectly — to 
have  influenced  the  quantity  of  precipitation  received  by  States  in  the  normal 
storm  path.  There  is  some  evidence  (not  unchallenged,  however)  that  agricul- 
tural, municipal,  and  industrial  activities  have  benefited  substantially  from  the 
increase  in  water  supplies  generated  by  damaging  storms. 

In  summary,  modification  of  Atlantic  or  Caribbean  hurricanes  inevitably  in- 
volves a  mixture  of  benfits  and  costs  so  complex  as  to  defy  even  the  grossest  kind 
of  guess  as  to  potential  economic  gains  at  this  time.  Given  the  inevitable  lack 
of  precision  in  dentifying  causal  relationships  running  from  the  modification 
procedures  to  perceived  winds,  waves,  and  precipitation,  public  confusion  is 
pkely  to  take  the  form  of  vigorous  defensive  action  by  those  who  feel  them- 
selves threatened. 

Analytic  Methods  for  Economic  Analysis 

In  1965,  at  a  symposium  on  the  economic  and  social  aspects  of 
weather  modification  held  at  the  National  Center  for  Atmospheric 
fosearcli,  the  question  of  identifying  and  measuring  the  economic 
aspects  of  weather  change  was  considered.  An  ideal  weather  pattern 
model  was  proposed  by  Ackerman.21  His  concept  was  that  the  model 
could  be  used  to  determine  what  weather  elements  mean  to  the  sys- 
tem of  economic  production  and  consumption  in  any  given  geograph- 
ical area  and  to  determine  an  ideal  weather  pattern  within  a  given 
system. 

Although  the  quantification  of  such  a  model  will  require  consider- 
able research,  the  idea  of  being  able  to  trace  the  impact  of  a  given 
weather  shift  throughout  the  economic  system  has  merit. 

A  number  of  standard  analytic  tools  are  available  for  use  in  eco- 
nomic analyses  of  weather  changes.  They  include :  input-output  mod- 
els, benefit-cost  analysis,  simulation,  regression  analysis,  and  linear 
programing.  All  of  these  approaches  have  potential,  but  they  all  share 
the  problem  of  lack  of  basic  data  and  understanding  for  quantification 
of  coefficients  and  parameters  fundamental  to  their  successful  use.  The 

20  Ibid. 

21  Ackerman.  E.  A..  1966.  "Economic  Analysis  of  Weather  :  An  Ideal  Weather  Pattern 
Model."  in  Sewell,  W.R.D.,  ed.,  1966.  "Human  Dimensions  of  Weather  Modification,"  Uni- 
versity of  Chicago,  Department  of  Geography,  research  paper  No.  105,  pp.  61-75. 


482 


design  of  an  input-output  model  has  been  described  by  Langford,22 
and  Gutmanis  and  Goldner 23  give  a  good  discussion  of  problems  as- 
sociated with  the  application  of  benefit-cost  analysis  to  weather  modi- 
fication issues. 

It  would  appear  that  economists  concerned  with  weather  modifica- 
tion programs  are  inclined  to  support  the  use  of  benefit-cost  analysis 
as  a  promising  technique  for  determining  comparative  social  costs  and 
benefits  of  such  programs.  A  difficulty  relates  to  the  extensive  geo- 
graphic scope  of  weather  modification  programs  compared  to  those 
ordinarily  assessed  by  benefit-cost  analyses.  In  addition,  there  is  little 
data  upon  which  to  evaluate  the  economic  consequences  of  large-scale 
weather  modification  activities.  For  limited-scope  weather  modifi- 
cation projects  such  as  fog  dispersal  at  airports  and  cloud  seeding  to 
artificially  induce  rain  in  a  small  region,  Maunder  suggests  that  many 
of  the  problems  associated  with  benefit-cost  analysis  could  be  over- 
come and  the  procedure  readily  adopted.24  Based  on  an  evaluation  of 
a  study  by  Gutmanis  and  Goldner,  Maunder  summarized  the  principle 
limitations  on  use  of  benefit-cost  analysis  for  expansive  weather  mod- 
ification programs  as  follows : 

(1)  The  extensive  geographic  and  functional  scope  of  such 
programs ; 

(2)  The  difficulties  in  obtaining  the  necessary  qualitative  and 
quantitative  data; 

(3)  The  difficulty  resulting  from  the  availability  of  several 
possible  technological  approaches  which  may  be  employed  in 
varying  degrees  either  singly  or  in  combination ;  and 

(4)  The  difficulty  in  integrating  and  supporting  benefit-cost 
analysis  with  welfare  economic  theory. 

Case  Studies  of  the  Economics  of  Weather  Modification 
hungry  horse  area,  montana 

Cloud  seeding  above  the  Hungry  Horse  area  was  conducted  in  1951, 
and  again  during  the  winters  of  1954  through  1958,  but  these  early  ef- 
forts did  not  provide  an  adequate  data  base  for  an  economic  assess- 
ment. Then,  in  1967,  based  on  the  results  of  a  1966-67  winter  seeding 
program,  North  American  Weather  Consultants  estimated  that  run- 
off in  the  region  would  be  increased  by  5  percent.25  On  tliis  basis,  it 
was  determined  that  an  increase  in  energy  production  at  all  down- 
stream power  installations  would  total  about  200,000,000  kWh  per  year, 
with  added  power  benefits  of  about  $500,000  per  year.  Initial  seeding 
costs  were  estimated  to  be  $300,000,  with  continuing  costs  of  $75,000 
to  $100,000  per  year. 

--  Langford,  T.  W.,  1968,  "A  Proposed  Model  for  the  Evaluation  of  Economic  Aspects  of 
Weather  Modification  Programs  for  a  System  of  Regions."  in  Sewell,  W.K.D.,  et  al.,  1968, 
"Human  Dimensions  of  the  Atmosphere."  National  Science  Foundation,  Washington,  D.C., 
pp.  113-120. 

M  Gutmanis,  I.  and  Goldner.  L.,  1966.  "Evaluation  of  Benefit-Cost  Analysis  as  Applied 
to  Weather  and  Climate  Modification.  '  In  Sewell,  W.K.I).,  ed.,  1  *»<;♦;.  "Human  Dimensions 
of  Weather  Modification."  University  of  Chicago,  Department  of  Geography,  research  paper 
No.  105,  pp.  111-12.-). 

;-"  Maunder,  W.  J.f  "The  Value  of  the  Weather,"  Methuen  &  Co.,  Ltd.,  London,  England, 
1970. 

*  North  American  Weather  Consultants.  "Performance  of  an  Atmospheric  Water  Re- 
sources Research  Program  in  the  Hungrv  Horse  Area.  Montana,"  1966—67,  report  No.  15-9, 
North  American  Weather  Consultants,  Goleta,  Calif.,  1!m;7. 


483 


CONNECTICUT  RIVER  BASIN 

In  a  1969  study,  the  Travelers  Research  Corp.  estimated  that  run- 
off from  the  entire  Connecticut  River  basin  might  be  increased  by 
about  2  million  acre-feet  (15  percent)  per  year  through  a  weather 
modification  program.26  It  was  calculated  that  this  increment  of  water 
would  cost  $2.30  per  acre-foot,  or  $4,600,000  annually.  The  report  also 
stated  that  net  benefits  of  $1,400,000  from  municipal  water  supply, 
and  $2,600,000  from  supply  of  cooling  water  for  thermal  electric  gen- 
erating stations  and  increased  flow  for  hydroelectric  power  generation 
might  be  realized  by  the  1980's.  Other  benefits  which  were  not  evalu- 
ated include  pollution  abatement,  agriculture,  groundwater  recharge, 
flood  control,  and  recreation.  These  are  not  all  mutually  compatible, 
however.  Travelers  estimated  that  an  average  water  supply  increase 
of  only  about  3  percent  would  permit  the  weather  modification  program 
to  pay  for  itself  in  approximately  15  years. 

The  Travelers  study  was  based  on  the  assumption  that  precipitation 
from  storms  occurring  during  all  seasons  of  the  year  would  be  in- 
creased by  15  percent.  Their  benefit-cost  analysis  was  based  on  average 
conditions  and  did  not  account  for  variances  in  benefit-cost  relation- 
ships which  would  occur  during  wet  or  dry  years. 

STATE  OF  ILLINOIS 

In  a  1972  study  of  the  impact  of  weather  modification  practices 
on  corn  and  soybean  yields  in  Illinois,  Huff  and  Changnon  concluded 
that  in  most  regions  of  that  State  corn  and  soybean  crops  could  be 
benefited  economically  through  a  cloud-seeding  program,  provided 
that  precipitation  increases  of  at  least  10  percent  were  achieved.27  It 
was  also  stated  that  rainfall  outputs  from  seeding  operations  would 
have  to  be  accurately  defined  or  "more  damage  than  benefit  could 
result." 

The  study  showed  that  a  good  deal  of  variability  could  be  expected 
from  year  to  year  and  that  differential  effects  could  be  expected 
in  a  significant  percentage  of  years,  that  is,  one  crop  might  be  helped 
and  another  harmed. 

These  studies  were  based  on  the  use  of  several  seeding  models  for  a 
sampling  period  of  38  years  and  thus  represent  anticipated  results 
rather  than  findings  based  on  observation. 

NINE-COUNTY  SOUTHEASTERN  CROP  REPORTING  DISTRICT,  SOUTH  DAKOTA 

A  1973  study  by  a  special  team  at  the  Agricultural  Experiment 
Station  of  South  Dakota  State  University28  showed  that  increased 
precipitation  could  have  considerable  direct  and  indirect  effects  on 
the  economy  of  a  region  by  increasing  crop  yields.  As  yields  increased, 
total  revenue  rose  rapidly,  with  costs  remaining  about  the  same.  A 


2«  Travelers  Research  Corporation,  "Water  From  the  Skv,"  Hartford.  Conn..  1069. 

v  Huff,  F.  A.  and  Changnon.  S.  A.,  Jr.,  "Evaluation  of  Potential  Effects  of  Weather  Modi- 
fication on  Agriculture  in  Illinois,"  Journal  of  Applied  Meteorology,  pp.  377  to  3S4.  Vol. 
11.  No.  2.  March  1972. 

as  Agricultural  experiment  station  special  study  team,  "Effects  of  Additional  Precipita- 
tion on  Agricultural  Production,  the  Environment,  the  Economy  and  Human  Society  in 
bouth  Dakota,"  South  Dakota  State  TJnivprsitv,  Brookings,  S.  Dak.,  June  1973,  pp.  113-12S. 


484 


conservative  multiplier  of  3.6  was  used  to  estimate  the  indirect  impact. 

For  the  nine-county  Southeastern  crop  reporting  district,  historical 
vields  produced  an  annual  total  revenue  of  $211,200,000,  total  costs 
of  $145,700,000  and  total  profits  of  $65,450,000.  These  base  data  were 
compared  with  the  results  of  nine  additional  combinations  of  yields 
and  prices.  Yields  used  were  minimum,  average  and  maximum  ex- 
pected increases  and  prices  ranged  from  the  historical  average  to  5-, 
10-  or  15-cent-per-bushel  decreases  for  all  marketable  grains. 

For  the  alternatives  considered,  total  revenues  ranged  from 
$2 13,100,000  to  $234,200,000  and  total  costs  were  found  to  vary  slightly 
from  the  historic  base  value,  with  the  highest  total  cost  up  only 
$800,000.  Total  profits  ranged  up  to  $87,700,000  for  the  run  using  max- 
imum expected  yield  increase  and  historical  average  prices.  In  this 
case,  profits  increased  34  percent  over  the  base.  The  lowest  profit  in- 
crease, 3.1  percent,  occurred  for  the  combination  of  the  lowest  expected 
yield  increase  and  a  5-cent-per-bushel  decrease  in  the  price  of  market- 
able grain  (10-  and  15-cent  decreases  per  bushel  in  grain  prices  were 
not  run  with  the  lowest  expected  yield  increase) . 

Indirect  benefits  were  computed  using  a  multiplier  of  3.6  and  were 
found  to  be  positively  related  to  direct  effects.  This  means  that  for  each 
SI  added  directly  to  the  economy  of  the  area,  a  $3.60  final  effect  on  the 
area's  economy  results.  A  manufacturing  segment  was  not  included  in 
the  analysis  and  the  study  team  noted  that  actual  indirect  benefits 
might  be  somewhat  higher  as  a  result  of  this  exclusion. 

The  direct  costs  of  weather  modification  were  found  to  be  approxi- 
mately 3.2  cents  per  acre  and  it  was  concluded  that  the  direct  costs 
associated  with  additional  precipitation  would  be  much  less  than  the 
benefits  which  could  be  expected. 

COLORADO  RIVER 

The  most  extensive  economic  analyses  of  weather  modification  prac- 
tices have  been  of  winter  orographic  snowpack  augmentation 
( WOSA)  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin.  Experimental  results  of  cloud- 
seeding  operations  in  southwestern  Colorado  suggest  that  runoff  in 
the  basin  can  be  increased  by  about  20  to  25  percent.29' 30  This  would 
result  in  an  average  annual  increase  of  about  2.3  million  acre-feet 
( maf ) .  An  operational  program  to  yield  this  flow  would  incur  a  direct 
cost  of  about  $5.4  million  per  year.31 

In  an  intensive  study  of  snow  enhancement  in  Colorado  by  the  Stan- 
ford Research  Institute,  Weisbecker  specified  two  categories  of  eco- 
nomic impacts.  These  are : 

(1)  Effects  on  the  cloud-seeding  target  areas  and  those  downwind 
areas  that  might  inadvertently  be  subjected  to  additional  precipita- 
tion; and  (2)  possible  uses  of  the  augmented  water  supply,  whether  in 
the  upper  or  lower  basins,  or  outside  the  Colorado  River  Basin. 


a  Hurley,  Patrick  A.,  "Augmenting  Colorado  River  by  Weather  Modification."  Journal  of 
the  Irrigation  and  Drainage  Division,  ASCE,  vol.  94,  No.  IR4,  Proc.  Paper  6271,  December 

1968.  pp.  303-380. 

"WRudell.  R.  K..  Stockwell.  H.  T.,  and  Walsh.  R.  G.,  "Weather  Modification:  An  Economic 
Alternative  for  Augmenting  Water  Supplies,"  Water  Resources  Bulletin,  vol.  9,  No.  1,  Feb- 
v  1977.  pp.  11;5-128. 

Weisbecker,  Leo  W..  "Technology  Assessment  of  Winter  Orographic  Snowpack  Augmen- 
tation in  the  Upper  Colorado  River  Basin,"  summary  report,  Stanford  Research  Institute, 
Menlo  Park,  Calif.,  May  1972,  pp.  13-19. 


485 


Regarding  economic  impacts  in  target  areas,  the  Stanford  study 
stated: 

The  known  effects  on  the  target  areas  are  almost  uniformly  adverse,  with  the 
exception  of  the  possible  advantages  that  extra  snowfall,  particularly  at  the 
beginning  of  the  season,  might  bring  to  operators  of  ski  resorts  and  their  patrons. 
Although  the  impact  on  the  upland  grazing  industry  appears  to  be  negligible, 
increased  costs  of  mining  operations  and  timber  cutting  (and  possible  suspension 
of  activities)  ;  interference  with  road,  rail,  and  air  transport;  and  shortening 
of  the  tourist  season  would  all  have  repercussions  of  an  unfavorable  sort  on  the 
economies  of  a  number  of  small  towns,  particularly  in  western  Colorado. 

Weisbecker  commented  that  measurement  of  the  extent  of  these 
effects  was  not  possible  on  the  basis  of  published  information  and  that 
extensive  field  work  would  be  required  to  adequately  assess  local  eco- 
nomic injury.  A  rough  annual  estimate  of  these  costs  was  given  as  $2 
million  in  the  basin  and  $1  million  out  of  the  basin,  which  is  about 
equivalent  to  $1  per  acre-foot  of  water  produced.  Adding  these  costs  to 
direct  costs  of  cloud  seeding  and  costs  of  avalanche  control,  flood  fore- 
casting, and  environmental  monitoring  programs,  produced  an  esti- 
mate of  the  cost  of  water  produced  of  less  than  $3  per  acre-foot.  Weis- 
becker noted,  "This  is  still  a  very  inexpensive  way  of  providing  extra 
water  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin." 

It  was  also  found  that,  although  there  might  be  significant  costs  on  a 
local  or  regional  basis,  the  small-scale  of  the  economies  and  the  few 
people  affected  adversely  would  assure  that  the  national  economic 
effects  would  be  negligible. 

The  report  concluded  that : 

If  only  existing  facilities  are  used  to  store  and  distribute  water  and  generate 
power,  benefits  of  at  least  $7.8  million  annually  could  be  generated  in-basin  and 
S5  million  annually  by  out-of-basin  spillover  runoff.  Of  the  $12.8  million  total 
annual  benefits,  $6.2  million  is  accounted  for  by  electric  power  generation.  This 
use  of  WOSA  provides  the  least  equivocal  form  of  benefits  for  an  operational 
program.  On  this  basis,  it  appears  that  the  benefits  of  an  operational  program 
could  exceed  the  sum  of  the  direct  costs  and  indirect  costs  to  the  areas  of  origin 
in  the  upper  basin. 

It  was  also  noted  that,  "WOSA  is  an  inexpensive  method  of  aug- 
menting the  water  supply  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin."  Annual  oper- 
ating costs  for  the  WOSA  system  were  estimated  at  about  $5.4  mil- 
lion, giving  an  average  cost  of  $2.37  per  acre-foot  for  in-basin  runoff 
alone  and  $1.58  per  acre-foot  overall. 

In  another  study  of  the  economic  aspects  of  WOSA.  Rudell  et  al. 
found  that  "weather  modification  is  an  economically  feasible  means 
to  provide  additional  water  for  the  Colorado  River  Basin."  32  The 
principal  findings  of  their  study  are  given  below : 

1.  The  benefit-cost  ratio  varies  with  place  of  water  use.  It  was  esti- 
mated to  be  13.1  to  1  for  Arizona,  16.3  to  1  for  New  Mexico,  and  21.3 
to  1  for  California. 

2.  Compared  with  other  recognized  means  of  augmenting  water 
supplies,  weather  modification  appears  to  be  one  of  the  least-cost  alter- 
natives. Direct  costs  of  $0.91  to  $1.15  per  acre-foot  of  water  produced 
were  reported.  Indirect  costs  of  additional  snow  removal  and  loss  of 
personal  income  due  to  mine  closings  were  estimated  to  add  $0.15  to 

32  Rudell.  R.  K..  Stockwell.  H.  T.,  and  Walsh.  R.  G..  "Weather  Modification  :  An  Economic 
Alternative  for  Augmenting  Water  Supplies,"  Water  Resources  Bulletin,  vol.  9,  No.  1,  Feb- 
ruary 1977,  pp.  115-128. 


486 


$0.19  per  acre-foot.  Extra  market  costs  due  to  traffic  delays  caused 
by  additional  snow  were  calculated  to  increase  costs  by  about  $0.15. 

3.  Only  about  12.4  percent  of  weather  modification  costs  is  for  capi- 
tal construction,  making  the  program  easily  reversible  with  little  loss 
of  sunk  costs. 

4.  Variable  costs  of  operation  are  about  $975  per  day.  Thus  small 
increases  in  daily  precipitation  would  cover  the  direct  costs  of 
operation. 

5.  Water  by  weather  modification  is  worth  $2  per  acre-foot  for 
power  production  and  $14.50  to  $26.50  per  acre-foot  for  irrigation  of 
forage  crops.  If  the  additional  water  is  used  for  higher  valued  crop 
production,  or  for  domestic  and/or  industrial  purposes,  its  value  is 
even  greater. 

6.  Extra  market  values  associated  with  weather  modification  could 
include  travel  delays,  grazing  and  timber  rescheduling,  and  changes 
in  plant  and  animal  communities.  While  such  factors  have  little  effect 
on  the  total  costs  of  weather  modification,  they  may  be  very  important 
to  those  directly  affected  and  could  influence  decisions  to  initiate 
weather  modification  projects. 

Conclusions 

The  state  of  the  art  of  operational  weather  modification  programs 
is  such  that  meaningful  economic  evaluation  of  such  activities  is  lim- 
ited to  special,  localized  cases.  As  stated  by  Crutchfield.33  there  is  a 
need  for  substantially  greater  knowledge  of:  "(1)  the  processes  that 
we  seek  to  alter;  (2)  the  methods  through  which  that  alteration  can 
be  achieved  ;  and  (3)  the  extent  to  which  the  resulting  effects  can  be 
anticipated  in  time,  space  and  degree." 

Nevertheless,  the  economic  potentialities  are  very  attractive.  Oper- 
ating costs  of  cloud  seeding  are  very  small,  ranging  from  5  to  20  cents 
per  acre  of  target  area,  and  the  needed  capital  equipment  is  relatively 
inexpensive.  The  few  economic  studies  which  are  available  suggest 
possible  benefit-cost  ratios  ranging  upward  to  20  to  l.34 


33  Crutchfield.  James  A.,  "Weather  Modification  :  The  Economic  Potential."  draft  of  pap?r 
prepared  for  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Univer- 
sity of  Washington,  Seattle.  Wash.,  May  1977. 

^Fleagle,  R.  G.,  Crutchfield,  J.  A.,  Johnson,  R.  W.,  and  Abdo,  M.  F.,  "Weather  Modifica- 
tion in  the  Public  Interest,"  University  of  Washington  Press,  Seattle,  Wash.,  1973,  pp. 
31-40. 


CHAPTER  13 


ECOLOGICAL  EFFECTS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

(By  William  C.  Jolly.  Analyst,  Environment  and  Natural  Resources  Policy 
Division,  Congressional  Research  Service) 

Introduction 

modification  of  weather  and  climate 

"Weather  and  climate  are  major  factors  in  human  activity.  Even 
when  human  communities  have  adapted  themselves  reasonably  well 
to  the  climate  of  a  region,  temporary  deviations  from  the  normal — 
severe  storms,  droughts,  unseasonable  frosts — periodically  cause  acute 
monetary  loss  and  personal  suffering.  Weather  modification  is  thus 
an  age-old  dream.  Research  on  atmospheric  processes  has  apparently 
brought  man  to  the  threshold  of  realizing  that  dream,  at  least  in 
part."  1 

Written  nearly  a  decade  ago,  those  words  still  succinctly  capture 
the  "why"  and  the  status  of  planned  weather  modification  efforts.  It 
is  axiomatic  that  weather  modification  actions  which  impact  human 
communities  also  impact  natural  communities  in  the  ecosystems  of 
which  both  are  but  components.  This  chapter  seeks  to  briefly  address 
the  ecological  implications  of  planned  and  inadvertent  weather  modi- 
fication in  target  and  nontarget  areas,  and  to  review  with  respect  to 
those  implications  the  level  of  understanding  which  several  investi- 
gations in  the  last  decade  have  sought  to  advance. 

It  is  the  function  of  this  chapter  to  summarize  the  current  state 
of  knowledge  about  ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  and  to 
do  so  for  a  general,  not  a  specialist,  audience.  Accordingly,  the  chap- 
ter represents  the  author's  distillation  of  salient  findings  of  others 
rather  than  any  original  contribution  of  either  ideas  or  research. 

ECOLOGY  AND  ECOLOGICAL  SYSTEMS 

At  the  risk  of  merely  restating  what  by  now  may  have  become  com- 
monly known,  if  not  obvious,  it  can  be  said  that  ecology  is  generally 
defined  as  the  study  of  the  relationship  between  living  organisms  and 
their  environments  (including  both  living  and  nonliving  components 
thereof).  That  is,  ecology  deals  both  with  organisms  in  their  environ- 
ment and  with  the  processes  of  movement  of  energy  and  matter  which 
link  organisms  and  place.  Ecological  systems — the  subject  matter  of 
ecology  and  the  structure  and  function  of  which  the  ecologist  seeks 

1  Charles  F.  Cooper  and  William  C.  Jolly.  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  :  a 
problem  analysis,  Ann  Arbor :  University  of  Michigan,  School  of  Natural  Resources,  1969, 
p.  1. 


(487) 


488 


to  study  and  understand — are  definable  complexes  of  related  biotic 
assemblages  of  animals,  plants,  and  microbes  together  with  their  par- 
ticular abiotic,  chemico-physical  environments.  As  Kormondy  lias 
noted: 

Ecosystems  are  real — like  a  pond,  or  a  field,  a  forest,  an  ocean,  or  even  an 
aquarium ;  they  are  also  an  abstract  in  the  sense  of  being  conceptual  schemes 
developed  from  a  knowledge  of  real  systems.  In  spite  of  the  great  diversity  in 
types  of  actual  ecosystems — from  small  to  large,  terrestrial  to  fresh  water  to 
marine,  field  to  laboratory — and  in  spite  of  the  unique  combinations  of  par- 
ticular abiotic  and  biotic  components  in  any  particular  one,  they  have  in  com- 
mon certain  general  structural  and  functional  attributes  that  are  recognizable, 
analyzable,  and  predictable.2 

In  seeking  to  understand  what  changes  in  plant  and  animal  com- 
munities may  result  from  any  given  modification  in  weather  which 
man  might  effect  deliberately,  it  is  to  the  young  evolving  science  of 
ecology  and  to  ecologists  that  decisionmakers  turn  for  best  judgments 
in  interpreting  the  relationships  which  may  be  affected  and,  in  some 
cases,  actually  predicting  the  nature  and  magnitude  of  ecological 
effects  which  can  be  expected. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  ecological  systems  require  a  knowledge 
of  both  past  and  present  in  order  to  predict  the  future.  Also,  ecology 
is  not  independent  of  time  and  place,  so  broad  generalizations  are  not 
easily  nor  accurately  made.  Thus,  while  descriptive  ecology  is  well- 
developed,  truly  predictive  ecology  is  but  in  its  infancy. 

KNOWLEDGE  OF  ECOLOGICAL  OIPLICATIONS  OF  APPLIED  WEATHER  MODI- 
FICATION TECHNOLOGIES 

If  1946  can  be  taken  as  the  benchmark  year  for  "modern"  weather 
modification  technology  (when  GE  scientists  Langmuir  and  Schaefer 
successfully  modified  clouds  by  "seeding"  them  with  pellets  of  dry  ice) , 
1966  can  be  said  to  mark  the  explicit  recognition  that  environmental 
effects  of  applied  weather  modification  technology  could  be  of  serious 
importance  and  were  yet  but  largely  a  matter  of  speculation.  In  that 
year,  the  ad  hoc  weather  working  group  of  the  ecological  study  commit- 
tee of  the  Ecological  Society  of  America  published  its  report  on  bio- 
logical aspects  of  weather  modification  which  it  had  submitted  to  the 
National  Science  Foundation's  Special  Commission  for  Weather  Modi- 
fication.3 The  report  of  the  NSF  Special  Commission,  also  published 
in  19G6,  noted  that  "from  the  present  crude  state  of  the  field,  one  can 
roughly  predict  that  the  biological  outcomes  of  weather  modification 
are  apt  to  be  a  mixed  bag  of  economically  good  and  bad  effects  in  man's 
artificial  ecosystems.  It  is  difficult  to  visualize  any  desirable  effect  on 
the  small  preserves  of  natural  communities.4  The  Commission  advised: 

It  is  the  position  of  the  Commission  that  there  should  be  a  strong  effort  to  bring 
the  field  of  biological  forecasting  up  to  a  higher  level  of  usefulness.  This  is  inan- 


2  Edward  J.  Kormondy,  Concepts  of  Ecology,  2d  ed.,  Englewood  Cliffs,  N.J.  :  Prentice- 
Hall.  1976.  pp.  1-2. 

3  D.  A.  Livingstone,  biological  aspects  of  weather  modification,  a  report  from  the  Ecolo- 
gical Society  of  America's  ad  hoc  w  eather  working  ^roup  of  the  ecological  study  committee 
to  the  Special  Commission  for  Weather  -Modification  of  the  National  Science  Foundation 
Bull.  Ecol.  Soc.  Amer.  47  (196G)  :  39-78. 

4  National  Science  Foundation,  weather  and  climate  modification,  report  of  the  Special 
Commission  on  Weather  Modification,  Washington,  D.C.,  National  Science  Foundation.  19G6, 
p.  19. 


489 


datory  in  planning  weather  and  climate  modification  over  areas  involving  more 
than  a  few  hundred  square  miles.5 

This  and  other  related  recommendations  of  the  NSF  Special  Com- 
mission directly  or  indirectly  led  to  a  number  of  ecological  studies 
which  have  been  specifically  concerned  with  identifying  and  predicting 
ecological  effects  of  weather  modification. 

One  of  the  first  sponsored  studies  was  the  problem  analysis  conducted 
by  Cooper  and  Jolly  6  for  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  as  that  agency 
began  to  better  balance  operational  weather  modification  research  with 
studies  aimed  at  understanding  ecological,  legal,  economic,  and  other 
social  effects  of  weather  modification  activity.  The  report  included 
"sections  on  anticipated  kinds  of  weather  modification ;  effects  in  semi- 
arid  climates  and  in  humid  climates ;  pests  and  diseases ;  direct  effects 
of  seeding  agents;  biology  of  lakes  and  streams:  fog,  hail,  lightning, 
and  hurricane  modification ;  environmental  monitoring  programs ;  in- 
ferences from  ecological  theory;  recommended  research;  and  recom- 
mended premodification  field  surveys."  7 

An  extensive  bibliography  of  relevant  literature  was  also  included. 
Cooper,  whose  1967  paper  on  the  effects  of  weather  modification  on 
plant  and  animal  communities  represented  one  of  the  earliest  attempts 
to  anticipate  ecological  ramifications  of  the  seriously  developing 
weather  modification  technology,8  has  continued  to  publish  on  the 
subject.9 

Other  major  studies  of  note  include  work  on  the  impacts  of  snow  en- 
hancement supported  by  the  National  Science  Foundation,10  and  the 
Bureau  of  Reclamation,11  and  on  impacts  and  issues  associated  with 
efforts  to  suppress  hail.12  Also  of  importance  and  interest,  of  course, 
are  the  proceedings  of  the  several  conferences  on  weather  modification 
which  have  been  sponsored  biennially  since  1968  by  the  American 
Meteorological  Society.  Papers  on  environmental  considerations  and 
impacts  associated  with  weather  modification  efforts  and  technologies 


5  Ibid.,  p.  20. 

6  Cooper  anrl  Jolly,  ecological  effects  of  weather  modification,  160  pp.  (Note  1.) 

7  Ibid.,  p.  160. 

s  C[harlesl  F.  Cooper,  effects  of  weather  modification  on  plant  and  animal  communities. 
Taper  presented  at  Symposium  on  Weather  Modification,  AAAS  Committee  on  Arid  Lands, 
New  York.  Dec.  HO.  1067  (mimeo). 

6  Charles  F.  Cooper,  ecological  impacts  of  local  and  global  weather  modification,  paper 
prepared  for  Hist  annual  meeting,  American  Meteorological  Society,  San  Francisco,  Jan.  14, 
1971.  16  pp.  (mimeo). 

Charles  F.  Cooper,  ecological  implications  of  weather  modification,  paper  prepared  for 
the  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board,  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  1977,  19  pp. 

(mimeo). 

Charles  F.  Cooper,  what  might  man-induced  climate  change  mean?  Foreign  Afrairs  56(3) 
(1978)  :  500-520. 

Charles  F.  Cooper,  Georsre  W.  Cox.  and  Warren  A.  Johnson,  investisations  recommended 
for  assessing  the  environmental  impact  of  snow  augmentation  in  the  Sierra  Nevada.  Calif., 
prepared  for  tbe  Bureau  of  Reclamation  and  the  California  Department  of  Water  Resources, 
San  Diego  :  San  Diego  State  University.  Center  for  Regional  Environmental  Studies,  1974, 
84  pp. 

10  Leo  W.  Weisbecker  fcorap.).  The  impacts  of  snow  enhancement,  contract  report  pre- 
pared for  the  National  Science  Foundation,  Norman  :  University  of  Oklahoma  Press,  1974, 
624  pn. 

13  Harold  W.  Steinhoff  and  Jack  D.  Ives  (eds.).  Ecological  impacts  of  snowpaek  augmen- 
tation in  the  San  Juan  Mountains.  Colorado.  Final  report  of  the  San  Juan  ecological  project 
to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  25  papers.  1976.  489  pp. 

22  Stanley  A.  Changnon,  et  al..  Hail  suppression,  impacts  and  issues.  Final  report,  tech- 
nology assessment  of  the  suppression  of  hail.  Office  of  Exploratorv  Research  and  Problem 
Assessment.  RANK  program,  National  Science  Foundation.  Urbana,  111.  :  State  Water  Sur- 
rey, 1977,  432  pp. 


490 


have  been  included  in  the  proceedings  of  these  conferences.13  The  final 
Environmental  Statement  for  Project  Sky  water,  published  in  1977  by 
the  Bureau  of  Eeclamation,  consists  of  a  three- volume  statement  cover- 
ing the  post- 1964  research  program  of  the  Bureau  relating  to  the  ef- 
fects that  cloud  seeding  for  increasing  growing  season  precipitation 
and  mountain  snowpacks  might  have  if  the  technology  were  applied 
over  long  periods  of  time.14  One  of  the  appendix  reports  attached  to  the 
statement  reviews  research  relating  to  environmental  effects  of  seeding 
agents,  particularly  silver  iodide.  The  question  of  the  effects  of  silver 
iodide  on  the  environment,  particularly  over  time,  has  also  been  ad- 
dressed and  reported  on  in  other  publications.15  The  definitive  review 
to  date  of  the  subject  of  environmental  effects  of  nucleating  agents, 
based  on  a  1976  workshop,  has  recently  been  prepared  by  Klein  ia 
under  National  Science  Foundation  sponsorship. 

Thus  in  the  12  years  since  the  National  Science  Foundation's  Spe- 
cial Commission  on  Weather  Modification  issued  its  report,  a  sig- 
nificant volume  of  research  aimed  at  determining  and  evaluating 
possible  ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  has  been  under- 
taken. In  summarizing  the  results  and  inferences  from  Project  Sky- 
water  which  relate  to  environmental  impacts,  Howell  tabulates  11 
individual  contracts  for  environmental  research  sponsored  by  Project 
Sky  water.17  They  cover  the  1964-76  period  and  total  nearly  $3 
million. 

Some  of  the  more  specific  findings  and  conclusions  of  the  research 
efforts  cited  above  are  extracted  and  summarized  under  the  various 
topical  headings  which  follow. 

Important  Variables 

As  Cooper  has  noted,  "Weather  modification  is  by  definition  a 
change  in  the  natural  climatic  environment.*' 18  He  continues :  "It  is 
impossible  to  predict  'the  ecological  effects  of  weather  modification.* 
A  specific  expected  alteration  in  the  natural  weather  pattern  must  first 
be  defined.  Usually  this  can  be  done  only  within  probability  limits. 
Unless  the  expected  change  in  climatic  input  to  the  ecosystem  is  known, 
no  reasonable  predictions  can  be  made.  Seldom  has  sufficient  infornia- 


13  See :  Proe.,  First  National  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  of  the  American  Mete- 
orological Society,  April  28-May  1,  1968,  State  University  of  New  York  at  Albany  :  173- 
ISO.  Boston  :  Amor.  Meteor.  Soc.  ; 

Proc,  Second  National  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  of  the  American  Meteorolog- 
ical Society,  April  6-9,  1970,  Santa  Barbara,  Calif.  :  411-414.  Boston  :  Amer.  Meteor.  Soc.  ; 

Proc,  Third  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society, 
June  26-20,  1972.  Rapid  City,  S.  Dak.  :  226-231.  Boston  :  Amer.  Meteor.  Soc.  ; 

Proc,  Fourth  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  of  American  Meteorological  Society, 
Nov.  18-21,  1974.  Fort  Lauderdale,  Fla. :  502-334.  Boston  :  Amer.  Meteor.  Soc. 

14  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  Final  environmental  statement  for  Project  Skywater.  Denver: 
Bureau  of  Reclamation  Engineering  and  Research  Division,  1977,  340  pp.  (vol.  1)  plus 
appendices  (vols,  2,  3). 

15  Charles  F.  Cooper  and  William  C  Jolly.  Ecological  effects  of  silver  Iodide  and  other 
weather  modification  agents:  a  review.  Water  Resources  Research  6  (1)  (1970)  :  88-98i 
D.  A.  Klein.  Ecological  impacts  of  nucleating  agents  used  in  weather  modification  prosrrams  : 
an  interdisciplinary  assessment,  J.  Weather  Mod.  9(4)  (1977)  :  51-56;  Ivan  C  Smith  and 
Ronnie  L.  Carson.  Trace  Metals  In  the  Environment:  Vol.  2.  Silver,  Ann  Arbor,  Mich.  :  Ann 
Arbor  Science  Publishers.  1977,  490  pp. 

19  D.  A.  Klein  fed.),  Environmental  impacts  of  nucleating  agents  used  In  weather  modi- 
fication. StrOudsberg,  Pa.  :  Dowden,  Hutchison  and  Ross.  1978. 

"Wallace  E.  Howell,  Environmental  Impacts  of  precipitation  management:  results  and. 
Inferences  from  Project  Skywater.  Bull.  Amer.  Meteor.  Soc.  58(6)  (1977)  :  489. 

18  Cooper,  Ecological  implications  of  weather  modification,  p.  1  (Note  9). 


491 


tion  about  expected  weather  changes  been  made  available  to  those  who 
would  make  ecological  assessments."  19  It  may  be  useful  to  mention 
a  number  of  the  variables  which  must  be  considered  before  one  can 
attempt  to  predict  the  ecological  impact  of  a  given  weather  modifica- 
tion. These  variables  are  treated  more  completely  by,  inter  alia,  Cooper 
and  Jolly,20  and  by  Cooper.21 

TEMPORAL  CONSIDERATIONS 

Season  of  modification  effort 

Within  a  given  ecosystem  reactions  of  vegetation  and  associated 
animal  communities  to  an  expected  5-percent  to  10-percent  increase 
in  mean  precipitation  during  years  of  normal  or  subnormal  precipita- 
tion will  vary,  for  example,  depending  on  whether  that  increase  falls 
during  a  dormant  or  a  growing  season,  or  whether  the  increase  comes 
in  the  form  of  rain  or  snow.  Whether  there  are  impacts  such  as  im- 
pedance to  physical  movement  (as  with  deep  snow  and  deer),  or 
threats  to  nesting  and  newborn  survival  (as  with  heavy,  cold  rains 
which  can  affect  incubating  ducks  or  newly  hatched  pheasant  chicks), 
may  also  be  of  importance.  Similarly,  if  a  plant  community  were  sub- 
ject to  moisture  stress  and  precipitation  enhancement  measures  pro- 
duced timely  relief,  the  impact  would  be  different  than  if  the  plants 
had  reached  a  point  of  no  return  in  their  response  to  moisture  depriva- 
tion. Thus,  the  season  at  which  a  given  effect  is  achieved  may  be  of 
prime  importance. 

Duration  of  effort :  Short-term  versus  long-term 

Biological  communities  evolve  and  exist  under  terms  of  natural 
variability  in  weather  and  climate.  The  kinds  of  reactions  of  such 
communities  to  weather  modifications  of  limited  duration  will  be  quite 
different  from  those  when  a  given  modification  recurs  with  some  regu- 
larity over  time.  Pest  or  disease  outbreaks  may  be  triggered  by  a  par- 
ticular change  of  critical  timing  in  a  moisture  regime,  for  example, 
but  changes  in  species  composition  in  ecosystems  will  normally  require 
at  the  very  least  more  than  one  season  of  change  in  precipitation 
pattern,  and  often  several  seasons  are  necessary. 

Regularity  of  modification  effort 

Just  as  the  duration  of  effected  changes  in  weather  pattern,  both  in 
terms  of  days  or  weeks  in  a  given  season  and  of  weeks,  months,  or  sea- 
sons of  a  given  year,  is  significant,  so  is  the  regularity  with  which  a 
given  change  is  produced.  Biological  communities  will  react  one  way  if 
a  10-percent  increase  in  mean  precipitation  is  realized  on  an  annual 
basis  but  the  timing  and  distribution  of  that  increase  is  rather  variable 
over  the  year  and  from  year  to  year.  The  response  may  well  be  dif- 
ferent if  the  increase  occurs  with  some  fidelity  at  a  given  season  (or 
seasons),  from  one  year  to  the  next — especially  if  the  time  of  such 
change  is  coincident  with  a  particularly  critical  time  in  the  life  cycle 
of  an  organism  or  a  community. 

19  Ibid.,  p.  3. 

»  Cooper  and  Jolly,  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  (Note  6). 
n  Cooper,  Ecological  implications  of  weather  modification  (Note  9). 


492 


ECOSYSTEM  TYPE 

The  kinds  of  response  to  any  given  change  in  weather  as  a  result  of  a 
modification  program  will  also  differ  depending  on  the  class  of  ecosys- 
tem being  affected.  A  few  dichotomies  will  illustrate  the  point. 

Aquatic  versus  terrestrial  systems 

Organisms  in  aquatic  systems  are  affected  by  such  variables  as  tur- 
bidity, temperature,  stream  velocities,  periods  and  durations  of  low 
flows,  and  the  chemical  quality  of  the  water,  including  relative  levels 
of  dissolved  oxygen.  Terrestrial  organisms  are  affected  by  the  timing, 
amount,  and  continued  availability  of  both  soil  and  surface  moisture, 
and  by  the  form  (water,  snow,  ice)  which  such  moisture  may  take. 
The  same  level  of  enhanced  (or  reduced)  precipitation  in  a  given  area, 
therefore,  will  have  different  significance  and  meaning  for  terrestrial 
than  it  will  for  aquatic  components.  It  is  necessary  to  distinguish  be- 
tween systems  being  affected  at  this  gross  level  as  well  as  at  finer  levels 
of  detail,  too. 

Cultivated  versus  natural  systems 
Howell  has  observed  that : 

Over  most  of  the  civilized  world,  the  natural  environment  is  profoundly  accul- 
turated  and  bears  few  traits  of  wilderness.  In  considering  the  natural  environ- 
ment, one  must,  therefore,  regard  the  environment  as  it  is  exemplified  by  the  real 
landscape.  Except  for  a  few  pockets  of  wilderness,  the  environment  is  the  prod- 
uct of  an  ongoing  symbiosis  between  the  land  and  humankind  [attributed  by 
Howell  to  Dubos].  It  is,  nevertheless,  useful  to  make  the  distinction  between  the 
direct,  intentional  impact  of  precipitation  management  on  a  cultural  element 
such  as  agriculture  and  the  complex  of  indirect  effects  that  may  impinge  on  other 
elements  of  the  landscape  and  biosphere,  be  these  "natural"  or  cultivated* 

Cooper,  in  treating  these  two  classes  of  ecosystems,  says : 

As  a  rule  of  thumb,  the  more  intensively  managed  a  tract  of  landscape,  and  the 
farther  it  is  from  its  natural  ecological  condition,  the  less  its  species  structure  is 
dependent  upon  the  detail  of  the  local  environment  and  the  less  sensitive  it  will 
be  to  minor  climatic  alteration.23 

Because  species  composition,  population  structure,  growth  rate,  and 
behavior  of  plants  and  animals  in  noncultivated  ecosystems  are  sig- 
nificantly different  from  those  attributes  of  cultivated  systems,  the 
effects  of  any  given  modification  of  weather  are  likely  to  be  signifi- 
cantly different  as  well. 

Arid  versus  liumid  systems 

As  one  would  expect,  a  given  relative  change  in  mean  precipitation 
in  more  arid  systems  would  be  more  likely  to  result,  over  time,  in  not 
only  changes  in  relative  species  composition,  but  possibly  changes  in 
vegetative  forms  (e.g.,  shrub  to  grass)  than  would  changes  in  humid 
ecosystems.  The  signal  to  noise  ratio  is  likely  to  be  stronger  in  the  more 
arid  situation  and  the  response  would  be  ecologically  less  subtle. 

CUMULATIVE  AXD  SYNERGISTIC  EFFECTS 

Finally,  the  obvious  must  be  stated,  as  Cooper  and  Jolly  did  earlier : 24 

Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  will  be  the  result  of  moderate  shifts  in 
rates  of  reproduction,  growth,  and  mortality  of  weather-sensitive  species  of  plants 

-  Howell.  Environmental  Impacts  of  precipitation  management:  results  and  inferences 
from  Project  Sky  water,  p.  493  (Note  17). 

::t  Cooper.  Ecological  implications  of  weather  modification,  pp.  6-7  (Note  9). 

24  Cooper  and  Jolly,  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification :  a  problem  analysis,  p.  2 
(Note  1). 


493 


;  and  animals.  Ecological  changes  from  the  kinds  of  weather  modification  now 
visualized  will  seldom  be  sudden  or  catastrophic.  Plant  and  animal  communi- 
ties change  rather  slowly  in  response  to  changed  climate.  The  cumulative  effect 
of  slow  year-to-year  changes  in  species  abundance  could  be  a  rather  extensive 

[  alteration  of  original  condition,  but  the  alteration  could  take  place  almost  un- 
noticed by  the  general  public. 

The  combined  effect  of  such  stresses  as  air  pollution,  pesticide  application,  and 
other  environmental  changes  may  interact  with  weather  modification  in  such  a 
way  that  the  total  effect  will  be  substantially  greater  than  the  sum  of  the  individ- 
ual, perhaps  relatively  small,  alterations. 

Effects  of  Silver  Iodide 

Nearly  all  current  weather  modification  efforts  depend  on  the  use  of 
seeding  agents  to  alter  the  microphysical  processes  within  clouds. 
While  silver  iodide  has  been  the  principal  nucleating  agent  to  date,  it  is 
not  the  only  such  agent.  It  could  be  replaced  in  the  future  because  of  the 
relatively  high  cost  of  silver  and  demands  that  widespread  application 
of  silver  iodide  might  place  on  the  silver  market.  The  advantages  of 
silver  iodide  with  respect  to  substitutes  are  its  capability  of  inducing 
ice  crystal  formation  at  relatively  high  temperatures,  the  ease  with 
which  it  can  be  finely  divided  and  carried  in  updrafts  to  cloud  bases, 
and  the  relatively  small  amounts  required  to  initiate  nucleation.  Ten 
to  1,000  times  the  weight  of  other  substances  is  required  to  produce  the 
same  quantities  of  ice  crystals.25  Other  seeding  agents  which  have  been 
used  or  whose  potential  use  has  been  investigated  include  dry  ice,  lead 
iodide,  common  salt,  liquid  propane,  water  spray,  and  a  number  of 
organic  compounds.  Some  of  these  seeding  agents  are  substitutes  for 
•  silver  iodide,  while  others  are  intended  for  increasing  precipitation 
from  warm  cloud  systems  or  dispersal  of  warm  fogs  through  the  co- 
alescence process,  where  silver  iodide  would  not  be  effective.  Since  the 
use  of  silver  iodide  in  weather  modification  experiments  and  opera- 
tions has  been  so  widespread,  the  following  discussion  is  limited  to  the 
potential  for  environmental  impacts  from  that  compound. 

Cooper  and  Jolly  reported  that  available  evidence  shows  little  likeli- 
hood of  environmental  effects  from  the  iodine  in  silver  iodide.  They 
cited  a  calculation  made  in  an  early  report  that : 

A  human  consumer  would  have  to  drink  130  gallons  of  precipitation  from  a 
storm  seeded  with  silver  iodide  to  obtain  as  much  iodide  as  in  eggs  flavored  with 
iodized  table  salt  and  concluded  that  iodide  is  ubiquitous  in  organic  and  inor- 
ganic environments.  ...  It  seems  reasonable,  therefore,  to  dismiss  iodine  in 
silver  iodide  at  present  levels  of  use  as  a  source  of  ecological  concern.26 

u  Particular  concern  is.  therefore,  for  the  effects  of  concentrations  of 
silver  in  the  soil  and  aquatic  systems,  and  it  should  be  recognized  that 
weather  modification  is  only  one  avenue  by  which  silver  compounds 
can  enter  these  systems. 

Silver  is  a  paradoxical  substance:  it  is  potent  as  a  microbial  poison, 
but  relatively  harmless  to  higher  animals  and  to  man.  It  forms  many 
different  chemical  compounds  which  differ  in  their  biological  activity, 

23  Bonnie  L.  Carson  and  Ivan  C.  Smith.  Silver  :  an  appraisal  of  environmental  exposure. 
Technical  Report  No.  3,  for  National  Institute  of  Environmental  Health  Sciences.  Contmet 
I    No.  N01-ES-2-2090.  Midwest  Research  Institute,  Kansas  City.  Mo..  July  16,  1975.  p.  221. 
,        23  Cooper  and  Jollv.  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification,  p.  64  (Note  1). 

Cooper  and  Jolly,  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  agents  :  a  review,  p.  89  (Note 
15). 


34-857—79  34 


494 


complicating  the  problem  of  interpreting  data  from  the  literature. 
Silver  is  unique  among  metals  in  combining  very  low  solubility  of 
most  of  its  compounds  with  high  toxicity  of  the  soluble  fraction,  with 
the  result  that  it  is  substantially  more  harmful  to  microorganisms  than 
it  is  to  higher  animals  and  plants.27  Silver,  even  in  its  highly  soluble 
form,  is  only  moderately  harmful  to  mammals,  but  is  much  more  toxic 
to  fish  than  to  terrestrial  vertebrates,  and  silver  levels  required  to 
damage  higher  plants  are  many  times  greater  than  those  which  would 
occur  in  precipitation  from  seeded  storms.  Because  most  land  plants  do 
not  actively  take  up  silver,  the  likelihood  of  concentrating  the  metal 
through  terrestrial  food  chains  is  small,  both  immediately  and  over  a 
period  of  perhaps  20  years.28  It  was  pointed  out,  however,  that  con- 
tinuous reassessment  during  such  a  period  of  application  should  be 
made  with  the  accumulation  of  new  information.29 

In  1974,  Klein  and  Molise  summarized  results  of  their  study  of  two 
Colorado  weather  modification  projects : 

In  summary,  the  silver  levels  found  in  soil,  litter,  and  vegetation  samples  in  two 
Colorado  weather  modification  projects  appear  to  be  at  least  one  to  two  orders  of 
magnitude  below  where  possible  interactions  between  accumulated  silver  iodide 
and  changes  in  decomposer  functions  have  been  observed  in  our  studies  to  date. 
The  trend  toward  silver  concentration  in  the  vicinity  of  plant  roots  suggests  that 
localized  higher  concentrations  may  occur  which  could  be  of  distinct  ecological 
interest.30 

Recently,  based  on  studies  supported  by  Project  Skywater,  Howell 
estimated  the  relative  quantities  of  total  silver  in  various  environ- 
mental compartments  for  the  contiguous  United  States. 

The  soil  compartment  (including  also  mud  and  vegetable  litter),  calculated  for 
the  top  20cm  comprising  the  root  zone,  contains  by  far  the  largest  quantity  of 
silver.  .  .  .  Living  matter  of  all  sorts  from  microbes  and  fungi  to  animals,  which 
has  on  the  average  a  slight  tendency  to  concentrate  silver  from  the  soil,  contains 
the  next  largest  quantity.  The  exchange  between  living  matter  and  soil  through 
uptake  and  decomposition  dominates  all  other  exchanges  by  at  least  an  order  of 
magnitude.  .  .  .  The  silver  concentration  and  content  in  lakes  and  rivers  are 
determined  mainly  by  depositional  and  erosional  exchanges  with  the  soil  and  by 
runoff  to  the  sea.  .  .  .  The  atmospheric  domain  receives  silver  in  the  form  of  wind- 
blown dust,  some  of  which  returns  to  the  soil  .  .  .  and  some  of  which  is  swept  up 
by  particles  of  precipitation.  .  .  .  The  silver  content  of  the  atmospheric  compart- 
ment at  any  moment  is  small  in  comparison  with  the  annual  transport  through  it.31 

Table  1  shows  the  annual  total  losses  of  silver  to  the  environment 
from  various  sources,  as  compiled  by  Carson  and  Smith.32  It  should  be 
noted,  in  comparison  with  other  sources  of  silver,  that  cloud  seeding 
contributes  about  0.1  million  troy  ounces  of  silver  annuallv,  about  1 
percent  of  the  silver  received  by  the  atmosphere  and  one-tenth  of  1  per- 
cent of  that  entering  the  total  environment. 


Cooper  and  Tolly.  "Ecological  Effects  of  Weather  Modification.'"  pp.  R4-65  (note  11. 
Cooner  nnd  Jolly.  "Ecological  Effects  of  Silver  Iodide  and  Other  Weather  Modification 
Agents"  :  a  review,  p.  SO  (note  15). 

-s  Cooper  and  Jolly,  "Ecological  Effects  of  Weather  Modification,"  pp.  GG-70  (note  1). 
20  Ibid.,  p.  70. 

WD.  A.  Klein  and  E.  M.  Molise.  Ecological  ramifications  of  silver  iodide  nucleating  acrent 
accumulation  in  soil  and  aquatic  environments.  Proc,  Eonrth  conference  on  weather  rnoiii- 
of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  Nov.  18-21,  1974,  Fort  Lauderdale,  Fla., 

P.  534-. 

•'Howell.  "Environmental  Impacts  of  Precipitation  Management":  results  and  infer- 
ence f;-oni  Project  Skywater.  pp.  400  407  (note  17). 

C  irsoil  and  Smith,  "An  Appraisal  of  Environmental  Exposure,"  pp.  403-406  (note  25). 


495 


TABLE  1.— ANNUAL  LOSSES  OF  SILVER  TO  THE  ENVIRONMENT  FROM  VARIOUS  SOURCES 
[From  Carson  and  Smith,  1975] 
[In  millions  of  troy  ounces] 


Loss  category 


Air 


Water  plus 
Water  land 


Land 


Total 


Mining  and  milling,  total  

Cyanidation   

Michigan  Cu  ore  tailings  

Other  Cu  ore  tailings   

Mo.  Pb  ore  tailings  

Mine  drainage  

Leaching  of  tailings  

Blowing  of  tailings   

Primary  smelting  and  refining,  total  

Of  copper  

Of  lead    

Of  zinc...    

Of  silver  

Secondary  smelting  and  refining,  total  

Of  precious  metal  scrap.  

Of  copper  scrap   

Of  lead  scrap.    

Fabrication,  total..   

Of  sterling  silver  

Of  medicinals  and  dental  materials.. 

Of  electroplate..  

Of  other  coatings   

Of  silver  compounds  

Of  photographic  products  

Brazing    

Use  and  disposal,  total...   

Photography.   

Brazing  alloys.   

Cloud  seeding  

Other  uses  

Urban  refuse  

Inadvertent  sources,  total  

Iron  production: 

Sintering  

Blast  furnaces  (5  percent  scrap). 
Steelmaking: 

Open  hearth  furnaces  (44  per- 
cent scrap)  

Basic  oxygen  furnaces  (29  per- 
cent scrap)  

Electric  arc  furnaces  (97  per- 
cent scrap)  

Iron  foundries  (—88  percent  scrap). 

Cement  manufacture   

Fossil  fuels: 

Petroleum  (fuel  oil  plus  gaso- 
line)    

Coal  

Total  


0.042 


(?) 

1.2-1.3? 
.  35-.  48 
.07? 
>.06? 
.7? 


(?) 
.0002 
.097 
.0002 
.0001 
. 00025 
.01175 
.  00025 
.084 
. 00015 
.92 
.07 
.07? 
.1 

>. 0003 
.68 

6.  0-7. 4? 

.03? 
.03? 


36-1.8?. 
015?  . 


.40? 
.38? 
3.1? 


.5 

1.24 


0.  70 
.024 


i2.4 


.47 
.73 
.78 


(7) 


4.  2-4.  35 
.  22-.  35 
1.5 


2  2.5 


3.  2-7.  2 
"\~65-.~16" 


03 


4.0 
4.0 


34.2 
3  12.0 


22.2 


(?) 


3.1 


20.  8? 


15.1? 


5.7 


5.5 
.70 
1.57 
2.56 


(?) 

(?) 
(?) 
15-.  26 


39.1 


>26.  8-28.2? 


9. 1-10.  6 


69.  6-73.  6 


78.  7-84.  2 


failings  ponds. 

2  Residues  probably  held  in  inventory. 

3Sewage  sludge:  lagooned,  3.2;  landfilled,  6.3;  landspreading,  2,500,000  troy  ounces. 
♦Dry  surface  piles:  7,800,000  troy  ounces. 

Of  the  ultimate  potential  for  environmental  impact  from  silver  in. 
cloud  seeding,  Howell  concluded : 

Cloud  seeding,  if  it  became  widespread,  would  result  in  local,  temporary  concen- 
trations [of  silver]  in  precipitation  of  the  same  order  of  magnitude  as  the  natural 
concentration  in  surface  waters  [streams,  lakes,  rivers,  etc.].  However,  the  rates 
of  exchange  [of  silver  in  surface  waters]  would  remain  more  than  one  order  of 
magnitude  smaller  than  the  principal  exchange  [rates]  affecting  the  aquatic  de- 
partment, and  they  would  be  many  orders  of  magnitude  smaller  than  those  affect- 
ing plants  and  soil,  even  in  localized  areas  of  precipitation  management.  Wide- 
spread and  prolonged  precipitation  management,  using  silver  iodide  as  the  cloud- 
seeding  agent  and  assuming  that  all  the  silver  dispersed  in  the  course  of  a  century 
accumulated  in  the  top  two  centimeters  of  soil,  would  not  cause  the  silver  con- 
centration  there  to  exceed  the  normal  background  [levels].33 

33  Howell.  "Environmental  Impacts  of  Precipitation  Management"  :  Results  and  inferences 
from  Project  Sky  water,  p.  497  (note  17). 


496 


Finally,  a  workshop  of  18  scientists  which  met  in  1976  to  assess  po- 
tential environmental  impacts  of  nucleating  agents  as  used  in  weather 
modification  efforts  concluded  their  review : 

In  summary,  the  members  of  the  workshop  felt  that  the  points  of  major  public 
concern  regarding  nucleating  agents  (effects  on  plant  growth,  game  animals  and 
fish,  as  points  of  special  public  interest)  represented  negligible  environmental 
hazards.  The  more  subtle  potential  effects 'of  silver-based  nucleating  agents,  such 
as  a  possible  ability  to  potentiate  the  movement  or  effects  of  other  materials  of 
environmental  concern  (other  metals,  pesticides,  etc.)  or  their  ability  to  influence 
the  activity  of  microorganisms  in  soils  and  aquatic  environments,' particularly 
after  localized  bioconcentration  by  plants,  warrant  continued  research  and  moni- 
toring activities,  although  any  effects,  if  they  might  occur,  are  not  expected  to 
involve  unacceptable  risks.  The  long  term  use  of  silver  iodide,  together  with  the 
confidence  which  the  weather  modification  profession  has  in  delivery  systems  and 
the  efficacy  of  this  material,  make  it  unlikely  that  other  agents  will  be  used  on 
a  large-scale  basis  in  the  future,  unless  improvements  in  delivery  systems  and 
major  changes  in  the  economics  of  silver  availability  might  occur.*4 

Deliberate  Weather  Modification 

Several  forms  of  deliberate  weather  modification  appear  worthy  of 
serious  consideration  over  the  next  few  years  to  a  decade  or  so.  They  in- 
clude precipitation  enhancement  (or  reduction),  hurricane  or  other 
severe  storm  abatement  or  other  modification,  fog  dispersal,  hail  sup- 
pression,  and  control  of  lightning.  The  following  sections  attempt  to 
encapsulate  the  best,  current  judgment  about  the  ecological  impacts  or 
other  etl'ects  of  applied  weather  modification  technology  in  each  of 
these  categories. 

PRECIPITATION  ENHANCEMENT 

In  general  efforts  to  alter  (usually  enhance)  precipitation  patterns 
can  1  >e  categorized  as  either  attempts  to  increase  rainfall  or  to  augment 
snowpack.  In  the  former  instance  the  modification  primarily  seeks  to 
benefit  a  local  economy,  usually  by  aiding  crop  production:  in  the  lat- 
ter case,  modification  is  undertaken  in  one  area  in  order  to  benefit  resi- 
dent of  another,  usually  by  augmenting  the  snowpack  in  watersheds  to 
increase  water  streamflows  to  the  advantage  of  downstream  users.35 

/ nereased  rainfall 

Cooper  and  Jolly.  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  and  Howell  all  provide 
more  complete  discussions  of  the  kinds  of  ecological  effects  which  can  be 
expected.    1  [owell's  treatment  is  excerpted  here  as  follow- : 

With  respect  to  the  vegetational  characteristics  of  the  environment,  increasing 
snmnier-convective  precipitation  is  accompanied  by  a  gradual  transition  from 
desert  shrnbland  to  short-grass  prairie,  to  tall-grass  prairie,  to  a  sabana  of  mixed 
grass  and  deciduous  forest,  and  finally  to  forest  *  *  *.  Precipitation  management 
would  tend  ro  shift  the  very  diffuse  boundaries  of  these  grand  divisions  somewhat 
westward  *  *  *. 


**  Kle in.  "Ecological  Impacts  of  Nucleating  Agents  Used  in  Weather  Modification  Pro-' 
grams"  :  an  Interdisciplinary  assessment,  p.  £T5  mote  154. 

35  Cooper.  "Ecological  Implications  of  Weather  Modification."  p.  2  (note  9). 

36  Cooper  and  Jolly.  "Ecological  Effects  of  Weather  Modification  :  a  Problem  Analysis," 
p.  1  t  note  1  i . 

Bureau  <>f  Reclamation,  Environmental  statement  for  Project  Skywater  C note  14).  How- 
ell. "Environmental  Impacts  of  Precipitation  Management:  Results  and  Inferences  From 
Proi«-r-t  Skywater.  '  p.  4sf>  (note  17). 

37  Howell.  "Environmental  Impacts  of  Precipitation  Management  :  Results  and  Inference 
Prom  Project  Skywater."  p.  401  (note  17). 


497 


Precipitation  management,  to  the  extent  that  it  may  moderate  the  intensity  of 
extreme  droughts,  will  cause  the  natural  vegetation  of  each  locality  gradually 
to  resemble  that  of  regions  now  slightly  moister  and  may  moderate  the  secular 
changes  in  species  composition  that  take  place  in  response  to  normal  climatic 
fluctuations. 

The  effect  of  precipitation  management  on  animal  populations  is  likely  to  he 
mainly  indirect,  through  its  influence  on  habitat,  rather  than  directly  on  the 
!  organisms.  Particularly  in  the  case  of  birds  and  small  mammals,  populations 
depend  more  on  the  presence  of  suitable  cover,  nest  sites,  and  food  supplies  than 
on  the  weather.  Though  severe  storms  at  critical  times  may  occasionally  decimate 
some  species,  there  is  little  expectation  that  precipitation  management  would  af- 
fect the  frequency  of  such  occurrences. 

The  best  expectation  presently  available  of  the  impact  of  summer-convective 
precipitation  management  is  that  each  present  environmental  compartment  would 
gradually  come  to  resemble  neighboring  compartments  on  the  moister  side  of  the 
precipitation  gradient,  with  no  apparent  risk  of  severe  disturbances'  accompany- 
ing this  transition. 

Snow  pack  augmentaion 

As  part  of  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation's  Colorado  River  Basin  pilot 
project  (to  determine  the  effectiveness  of  seeding  winter  orographic 
9y stems  for  increased  snowpaek  and  spring  runoff) ,  a  6-year,  $1  million 
research  project  was  conducted  to  study  the  ecological  impacts  of  snow- 
pack  augmentation  in  the  San  Juan  Mountains  of  Colorado.  The  study 
aimed  to  assess  ecological  effects  of  a  theoretical  increase  in  snowpaek 
of  16  percent  a  year  of  average  snowfall  and  to  study  the  range  of  in- 
crease up  to  30  percent.  The  report,  edited  by  Steinlioff  and  Ives,  in- 
cludes the  results  of  a  team  of  33  scientists.38  The  basic  environmental 
changes  assessed  were  the  addition  of  more  snow  and  more  silver. 
Primary  effects  inpacting  an  ecosystem  components  were  :  "(1)  lower 
soil  temperature  in  the  spring,  (2)  more  moisture  in  the  spring,  (3) 
deeper  snowpaek,  and  (4)  more  silver."  39  The  following  excerpts  are 
taken  from  the  editors'  "Summary  of  Key  Conclusions" : 40 

Initiation  of  shoot  elongation  was  delayed  for  plants  both  in  the  tundra  and 
forests  as  a  result  of  lower  soil  temperature  associated  with  deeper  snowpaek  for 
the  species  studied.  These  included  Englemann  Spruce  (Picca  engelmannii) , 
quaking  aspen  (Popirius  tremuloides) ,  Thurber  fescue  (Fcstuca  Thurbrrh,  and 
,  numerous  herbaceous  species  in  both  the  tundra  and  forest  meadows. 

Only  the  lower  soil  temperature  and  greater  snow  depth,  which  might  be  ex- 
pected to  follow  an  increase  in  snowfall,  have  been  found  influential  on  animal 
activity.  A  noticeable  decline  in  forest  populations  of  small  mammals  occurred  fol- 
lowing winters  of  heavy  snowfall.  This  was  most  evident  in  the  numbers  of  deer 
mice  (Peromyscus  maniculatns) ,  but  it  was  also  found  in  chipmunks  (Eutamias 
minimus)  and  in  Microtus  spp.  The  basic  reason  for  the  population  decline 
derives  from  the  delayed  growth  of  essential  spring  foods  and  results  primarily 
from  a  delay  in  breeding  so  that  fewer  litters  are  produced.  The  delayed  growth 
of  plants  was  a  function  of  lower  soil  temperature  and  the  longer  snow  cover. 

As  snow  depth  increased,  elk  (Cervus  canadensis)  moved  to  areas  where  snow 
was  shallower  than  40  cm.  They  avoided  regions  with  more  than  70  cm  of  pene- 
trable snow  depth.  A  15-percent  increase  in  snowpaek  may  decrease  available  elk 
winter  range  by  8  percent. 

No  significant  increase  in  silver  concentrations  were  found  in  the  target  area, 
except  in  small  areas  near  generator  sites,  after  four  winters  of  seeding.  No* 
deleterious  effects  of  silver  iodide  additions  have  been  noted  to  concentrations 
which  could  be  expected  due  to  cloud  seeding. 


38  Steinhoff  and  Ives  (eds.),  "Ecological  Impacts  of  Snowpaek  Augmentation  in  the  San 
Juan  Mountains,  Colorado  (note  11). 
89  Ibid.,  p.  1. 
40  Ibid. 


498 


Additional  treatment  of  effects  of  snowpaek  augmentation  may  be 
found  in  the  comprehensive  report  compiled  by  Weisbecker  41  and  in 
the  paper  of  Howell.42  The  latters  "bottom  line"  conclusion,  quoting 
from  Steinhoff  and  Ives?  work,  is : 

There  should  he  no  immediate,  large-scale  impacts  on  the  terrestrial  ecosystems 
of  these  [San  Juan]  mountains  following  an  addition  of  up  to  30  percent  of  the 
normal  snowpack,  but  with  no  addition  to  maximum  snowpacks.  Further,  much 
of  the  work  reported  here  suggests  that  compensating  mechanisms  within  the 
studied  ecosystems  are  such  that  any  impacts  would  be  buffered,  at  least  for  short 
periods  of  time,  and  of  lesser  magnitude  than  the  changes  in  snow  conditions 
required  to  produce  them. 

Our  work  has  shown  three  ecosystem  components  to  be  most  susceptible  to 
increased  snowfall :  (1)  snowbank  situations  at  elevations  above  treeline  ;  (2)  elk 
herds  (in  other  mountain  ranges  other  big  game  species  may  be  similarly 
affected)  :  and  (3)  some  small  mammal  populations,  especially  the  deer  mouse. 
Xot  all  of  these  impacts  are  necessarily  deleterious;  an  increase  in  the  area  of 
snowbank  edge  habitats  in  alpine  areas  may,  for  example,  increase  the  niches 
available  for  rare  plant  species. 

Finally,  even  in  the  small  areas  where  we  predict  greatest  impacts  from 
increased  snowfall,  the  changes  involved  are  unlikely  to  approach  the  magnitude 
of  other  man-made  impacts  on  mountain  ecosystems. 

However,  it  should  be  remembered  that  they  may  act  in  phase  with  other 
man-made  impacts  and  with  natural  climatic  changes,  in  which  case  the  total 
effect  could  be  much  greater  than  our  studies  suggest. 

SEVERE  STOR^r  ABATEMENT 

Essentially  synonymous  with  hurricane  control,  this  technology 
offers  some  promise  of  mitigating  the  onshore  impacts  of  such  major 
storms  by  reducing  their  intensity  and/or  altering  their  paths,  both 
through  judicious  seeding  of  the  storm  while  still  well  out  at  sea.  The 
"state  of  the  art"  is  such  that  few  answers  of  the  long-term  ecological 
(  fleets  of  applying  such  a  technology  are  available.  Cooper  and  Jolly 43 
sketched  a  number  of  possible  implications  and  speculated  about  some 
of  the  effects.  More  recently.  Cooper  identified  a  number  of  specific 
questions  lie  felt  should  be  addressed  before  hurricane  modification 
research  is  carried  out  on  an  extensive  scale  : 44 

1.  What  is  the  importance  of  hurricanes  in  bringing  precipitation  to  con- 
tinental areas  such  as  eastern  U.S.?  Will  this  delivery  be  affected  by  hurricane 
modification?  What  fraction  of  hurricane  precipitation  is  actually  useful  and 
effective,  and  what  fraction  is  primarily  flood-producing?  Will  this  ratio  be 

affected? 

2.  What  is  the  role  of  hurricanes  in  the  biology  of  coral  reefs  and  in  the  pro- 
ductivity of  tropical  marine  fisheries?  There  is  evidence  that  hurricanes  improve 
fishing  in  the  Caribbean  ( Florida)  and  in  the  Pacific.  How  would  control  affect 
the  livelihood  of  subsistence  fishermen  in  the  Pacific? 

3.  How  important  are  hurricanes  as  determinants  of  forest  structure  an( 
growth?  Influences  are  known  from  St.  Vincent,  New  England,  and  tbe  Solomoi 
Islands,  among  others. 

Clearly  there  may  l>e  significant  ecological  ramifications  on  severa 
scales  if  severe  storm  abatement  technology  is  applied.  Yet,  good  re 
sea  rcli  answers  are  seemingly  still  a  ways  off. 


*'  Welsbecker,  "The  Impact  of  Snow  Enhancement,"  p.  xil.  20f* -352  (note  101. 

48  Howell,  "Environmental  Impacts  of  Precipitation  Management  :  Results  and  Infer 
encee  From  Project  Skywater,*'  p.  4!>4  (note  17). 

1  Cooper  ana  Jolly,  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification:  a  problem  analysis,  Dp 
85  88  i  Note  1). 

**  Cooper.  Ecological  Implications  of  weather  modification  (Note  9). 


499 


FOG  DISPERSAL 

Cold  fog  dispersal  is  now  rather  easily  effected  locally,  principally 
over  airports,  although  warm  fog  dispersal  remains  more  difficult  and 
expensive.   Cooper  and  Jolly  foresaw  no  significant  ecological  effect 
,  from  the  expected  kinds  of  fog  dispersal  in  the  1969  report 45  and  that 
conclusion  was  more  recently  restated  by  Cooper.46 

HAIL  SUPPRESSION 

An  interdisciplinary  assessment  of  hail  suppression  in  the  past,  pres- 
ent, and  future  has  been  recently  reported.47  The  authors  concluded 
the  technology  is  currently  scientifically  uncertain  but  potentially 
beneficial,  and  one  which  would  be  widely  adopted  in  the  Great 
Plains  with  benefits  to  agriculture  and  the  American  consumer.48  As 
recently  as  1977,  Cooper  concluded  that  hail  suppression  technology 
offers  no  likely  ecological  implications  beyond  those  associated  with 
the  effects  on  precipitation  which  would  presumably  attend  its  appli- 
cations.49 

ALTERATION  OR  ARREST  OF  LIGHTNING  DISCHARGES 

As  is  the  case  with  hail  suppression  technology,  there  does  not  seem 
to  be  reason  to  anticipate  any  significant  ecological  effects  from  ap- 
plying lightning  alteration  efforts  beyond  those  to  be  associated  with 
precipitation  affects.  Again,  Cooper  and  Jolly  largely  dismissed  any 
grounds  for  significant  ecological  concern  with  respect  to  lightning 
modification  in  1969  50  and  Cooper  in  1977  reiterated  that  posi- 
tion.01 

Inadvertent  Weather  Modification 

Inadvertent  weather  modification  can  be  defined  to  include  both  un- 
intended effects  on  nontarget  areas  of  deliberate  modifications  aimed 
at  target  areas,  and  of  totally  unintended  modifications  as  a  result  of 
man's  activities  not  related  to  planned  weather  influences  or  opera- 
tions. Regardless  of  the  category,  however,  there  are  ecological  rami- 
fications involved. 

EXTRA-AREA  EFFECTS 

Concern  with  extra  area,  usually  downwind,  effects  is  almost  as  old 
as  weather  modification  efforts  themselves.  The  most  common  public 
concern  has  been  of  the  "rob  Peter  to  pay  Paul"  variety  wherein  it  is 
alleged  or  at  least  feared  that  increased  moisture  for  A's  benefit 
through  cloud  seeding  must  come  from  a  B,  at  some  point.  Howell  has 
written  the  following  summary  conclusions  about  effects  of  cloud  seed- 
ing on  precipitation  in  nearby  areas ;  "the  assumption  that  augmenta- 
tion of  precipitation  in  one  place  must  result  in  its  diminution  some- 


43  Cooper  and  Jolly,  "Ecological  Effects  of  Weather  Modification  :  A  Problem  Analysis," 
p.  83  (Note  1). 

46  Cooper.  "Ecological  Implications  of  Weather  Modification."  p.  15  (Note  9). 

47  Changnon.  et  al.,  "Hail  Suppression  :  Impacts  and  Issues"  (Note  12)  ;  Stanley  Chang- 
non.  Barbara  C.  Farhar,  and  Earl  R.  Swanson,  "Hail  Suppression  and  Society."  Science  200 
(4840)  (28  April  1978)  :  p.  387. 

4S  Changnon.  Farhar,  and  Swanson,  "Hail  Suppression  and  Society,"  p.  387  (Note  47). 

49  Cooper,  "Ecological  Implications  of  Weather  Modification,"  p.  14  (Note  9). 

50  Cooper  and  Jolly,  "Ecological  Effects  of  Weather  Modification  :  A  Problem  Analysis" 
(Note  1). 

51  Cooper,  "Ecological  Implications  of  Weather  Modification,"  p.  14  (Note  9). 


500 


where  else  is  plausible  but  fallacious."  He  continues,  "The  fallacy  lies 
in  failure  to  appreciate  (1)  the  role  of  natural  atmospheric  disturb- 
ances in  causing  the  convergence  and  ascent  of  moist  air  as  the  domi- 
nant mechanism  that  makes  moisture  available  for  cloud  formation 
and  (2)  the  potential  of  cloud  seeding  both  for  increasing  the  dynamic 
energy  of  such  disturbances  and  for  increasing  the  efficiency  with 
which  the  storm  clouds  are  converted  to  precipitation.  *  *  *  Model 
studies  of  convective  rain  clouds  are  not  far  enough  advanced  to  pre- 
dict the  outcomes  with  high  confidence,  but  at  least  they  offer  no  encour- 
agement to  the  notion  that  cloud  seeding  robs  Peter  to  pay  Paul."  52 

Howell  adds:  "Studies  of  rainfall  downwind  from  actual  summer- 
convective  cloud  seeding  operations  have  been  inconclusive,  with  the 
evidence  tending  to  favor  some  increase  out  to  distances  of  400  kilo- 
meters or  so.  However,  the  types  of  operations  involved  have  been  so 
disparate  that  no  general  conclusions  are  possible.  Studies  of  precipi- 
tation downwind  of  winter-orographic  cloud-seeding  operations  con- 
firm the  presence  of  increases  at  distances  of  approximately  250  kilo- 
meters. The  evidence,  therefore,  does  not  support  the  notion  that 
stimulation  of  precipitation  in  one  area  deprives  another  area  but  sug- 
gests that  seeding  may  strengthen  existing  precipitation  systems."  53 

A  fuller  treatment  of  extra  area  effects  is  provided  in  chapter  3  of 
this  CRS  weather  modification  report. 

LONG-TERM,  CLIMATIC  AXD  GLOBAL  IMPLICATIONS 

Finally,  it  is  desirable  to  point  out  that  alteration  of  weather 
brought  about  by  cloud  seeding  or  other  deliberate  interference  with 
atmospheric  processes  will  necessarily  be  superimposed  against  the 
record  of  long-term,  natural  changes  of  climate  and  the  ubiquitous, 
year-to-year  variability  of  climate  and,  in  addition,  any  inadvertent 
effects  attributable  to  human  activities.  The  evolution  of  natural  cli- 
matic change  and  variability  and  the  possibility  that  society,  through 
its  own  actions,  may  be  altering  the  climate  by  pushing  on  certain 
leverage  points  make  it  more  difficult  to  assess  the  reality  of  planned 
weather  modification,  because  claimed  results  may  in  fact  be  due  to 
other  causes.  Furthermore,  the  ecological  effects  of  a  planned  weather 
change  may  be  partially  masked  by  unanticipated  changes  in  other 
climatic  variables.54 

While  man  lias  become  generally  aware  of  some  of  the  environ- 
mental effects  of  his  polluting  the  air  and  waters  of  the  planet,  he  has 
barely  begun  to  credibly  study  the  global  implications  of  long-term 
climatic  change  which  may  be  exacerbated  or  even  caused  by  his  inad- 
vertent impacts  on  global  atmospheric  and  oceanic  processes.  "While 
no  solid  ecological  answers  are  yet  demonstrable,  the  implications  of 
industrially  caused  acid  rains,  impacts  on  the  carbon  dioxide  cycle  of 
deforestation  as  well  as  the  burning  of  fossil  fuels  and  similar  scale 
concerns  are  all  terribly  Serious.  Cooper  has  recently  articulated  some 
of  these  concerns,  too.55 

•r-2  Howell.  "Environmental  Impacts  of  Procinitntion  Management  :  Results  ami  Inferences 
From  Project  Skywater,"  pp.  491-402  (Note  17). 
•"-'!  Ibid,,  p.  402. 

M  fuopor  and  .Tollv,  "Ecological  Effects  of  Weather  Modification  :  A  Problem  Analysis,'* 
p.  17  (Note  1). 

w  Cooper,  "What  Mipht  Man-Induced  Climate  Change  Mean?"  (Note  9). 


501 


A  comprehensive  and  detailed  discussion  of  inadvertent  weather 
and  climate  modification  appears  in  chapter  4  of  this  CES  text  on 
weather  modification. 

Summary  and  Conclusions 

This  chapter  seeks  to  review  a  number  of  recent  studies  aimed  at  ad- 
dressing and  answering  questions  about  the  ecological  effects  of  vari- 
ous kinds  of  weather  modification  activity.  In  general,  the  body  of  di- 
rected research  with  respect  to  these  concerns  is  still  limited  but  sig- 
nificantly greater  than  was  the  case  a  decade  or  even  less  ago. 

Economically  significant  weather  modification  will  always  have  an 
eventual  ecological  effect,  although  appearance  of  that  effect  may  be 
delayed  or  hidden  by  system  resilience  and/or  confounded  by  system 
complexity. 

It  will  never  be  possible  to  predict  "the  ecological  effects  of  weather 
modification."  However,  the  more  precisely  the  weather  modifier  can 
specify  the  effects  he  will  produce  in  terms  of  average  percentage  in- 
crease or  decrease  in  precipitation  (or  other  climatic  variable),  ex- 
pected seasonal  distribution  of  the  change,  expected  year-to-year  dis- 
tribution of  the  change,  geographic  distribution  of  the  change,  changes 
in  relative  form  of  precipitation,  and  the  like,  the  more  precise  can  be 
the  ecologist's  prediction  of  likely  ecological  effects. 

Ecological  effects  of  weather  modification  will  be  the  result  of 
moderate  shifts  in  rates  of  reproduction,  growth,  and  mortality  of 
species  of  plants  and  animals  which  are  sensitive  to  weather.  Effects 
will  rarely,  if  ever,  be  sudden  or  catastrophic  because  plant  and  ani- 
mal communities  react  to  changes  in  climate  much  more  than  changes 
in  weather.  Accordingly,  those  modifications  in  the  weather  which 
occur  with  significant  regularity  over  time — eventually  constituting  at 
least  a  micro-climatic  shift  of  some  degree — are  the  ones  to  which  bio- 
logical communities  will  react. 

Animal  populations  will  rarely  be  affected  directly  by  weather  mod- 
ification activities  but  will  rather  be  indirectly  affected  as  their 
habitat  is  altered  as  vegetative  changes  occur. 

T\reather  modification,  being  a  change  imposed  on  an  already  vari- 
able climate,  will  nevertheless  have  an  inexorable,  if  subtle,  effect  on 
long-term  structure  of  plant  and  animal  communities  as  they  respond 
to  average  climatic  conditions. 

Such  adjustments  of  plants  and  animal  communities  will  usually 
occur  more  slowly  in  regions  of  highly  variable  weather  than  in  those 
of  relatively  uniform  weather  conditions.  Similarly,  deliberate  pre- 
cipitation change  is  likely  to  have  greater  ecological  impact  in  semi- 
arid  systems  and  less  in  humid  ones. 

Widespread  cloud  seeding  could  result  in  local,  temporary  concen- 
trations of  silver  in  precipitation  which  are  of  the  same  order  of  mag- 
nitude as  the  natural  concentration  in  surface  waters,  though  the  rates 
of  exchange  would  remain  more  than  an  order  of  magnitude  smaller 
than  principal  exchanges  for  the  aquatic  environment.  Exchange  rates 
would  be  many  orders  of  magnitude  smaller  than  those  affecting 
plants  and  soil,  even  in  localized  areas  of  precipitation  management. 

It  is  still  a  reality  that  our  level  of  ignorance  of  ecological  effects  of 
changes  in  weather  and  climate  exceeds  our  level  of  knowledge. 


APPENDIXES 


Appendix  A 

Statement  ox  Weather  [Modification  in  Congressional  Record  of 
June  17, 1975,  by  Congressman  Gilbert  Gude,  Containing  White 
House  Statement  on  Federal  Weather  Modification  Policy 

Weather  modification 

(Mr.  Gude  asked  and  was  given  permission  to  extend  bis  remarks  at  this 
point  in  the  Record  and  to  include  extraneous  matter.) 

Mr.  Gude.  Mr.  Speaker,  I  would  like  to  bring  to  my  colleagues'  attention  an 
exchange  of  correspondence  Senator  Pell,  Congressman  Fraser,  and  I  have 
recently  had  with  the  White  House  concerning  Federal  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities. On  April  23,  we  wrote  the  President  the  following  letter  urging  the  crea- 
tion of  a  lead  agency  to  coordinate  Federal  work  on  weather  modification  and 
urging  that  such  research  be  conducted  by  civilian  agencies  rather  than  the  De- 
fense Department : 

House  of  Representatives, 
Washington,  D.C\,  April  23, 197o. 

The  President. 
The  WJiite  House. 

Dear  Mr.  President  :  As  authors  of  several  resolutions  for  outlawing  environ- 
mental modification  as  a  weapon  of  war,  we  now  write  recommending  govern- 
ment work  in  the  peaceful  uses  of  such  modification  that  could  help  to  promote- 
energy  conservation,  safeguard  the  environment  and  stabilize  agricultural  produc- 
tion. In  sending  these  recommendations,  we  wish  to  make  clear  that  we  support 
continued  research,  particularly  into  weather  modification  for  peaceful  purposes, 
regarding  which  we  believe  there  currently  exist  numerous  opportunities  for  its 
applications. 

The  role  of  weather  modification  in  energy  conservation  was  sharply  outlined 
in  a  recent  example  which  came  to  our  attention.  Coming  from  Boston  to  Washing- 
ton, a  recent  flight  was  delayed  by  bad  weather  and  according  to  one  passenger's 
calculations,  as  much  fuel  was  exhausted  around  Washington  while  the  plane 
waited  to  land  as  was  consumed  during  the  entire  flight  from  Boston.  This  is  only 
one  example  of  the  energy  costs  of  bad  weather,  but  weather  conditions  being 
what  they  are,  it  is  a  frequent  case.  Research  into  fog  dissipation  is  precisely  the 
kind  of  work  which  can  reduce  those  costs. 

We  are  only  beginning  to  research  and  understand  how  our  own  industrial 
development  has  inadvertently  modified  weather  and  environment.  Studies  are 
beginning  to  show  differences  in  temperature  and  air  quality  over  urban  and  in- 
dustrial areas,  which  affected  the  immediate  environment  as  well  as  influence 
weather  downwind.  There  is  sufficient  growing  suspicion  that  inadvertent  environ- 
mental modification  can  help  produce  extremes  of  weather,  such  as  drought,  to 
warrant  further  investigation  and  research. 

The  implications  of  weather  modification  for  agriculture  are  obvious  and  vari- 
ous efforts  to  enhance  rainfall  have  been  going  on  for  years.  These  efforts,  how- 
ever, need  coordination  and  careful  study  to  help  determine  what  approaches  are 
productive,  what  types  of  weather  formation  are  most  susceptible  to  modification 
and  how  modification  in  one  area  affects  weather  elsewhere.  Clearly,  the  potential 
for  increased  agriculture  output — both  domestically  and  worldwide — is  great. 

(503) 


504 


Given  these  opportunities,  it  is  unfortunate  that  civilian  directed  research  has 
been  diffused.  The  fiscal  1975  budget  shows  weather  modification  projects  in  six 
agencies  and  a  division  by  function  as  follows: 


Fiscal  year— 


1973 

1974  1975 

Department  of  Agriculture.   

Department  of  Commerce  

Department  of  Defense  

Army  

  366 

  4,779 

  (1,209) 

  160 

270 
4,  673 

<...«> 

150 
4,  575 
(1,300) 

Navy.  

Air  Force    

Department  of  the  Interior    

Department  of  Transportation    

National  Science  Foundation     

  404 

   645 

    6,370 

1,067 

   5,790 

399 

666 

3,  900 
1,397 

4,  000 

555 
745 
3  445 
1,520 
4,  270 

Total  

19,581 

15,  401 

15,270 

DIVISION  BY  FUNCTION 

Fiscal  year — 

1973  1974 

1975  Agencies 

Precipitation  modification      . 

Fog  and  cloud  modification     1. 

Hail  suppression..     

lightning  modification       

Hurricane  and  severe  storm  modification    

Social,  economic,  legal,  and  ecological  studies  

Inadvertent  modification  of  weather  and  climate  

Support  and  services.      

5,472  3,735 

  1,541  1,194 

  2, 860       2, 000 

  624  330 

  1,818  1,741 

  1, 740        1, 310 

  3, 252       3, 643 

  2,274  1,475 

3,279   DOC,  DOI. 
1,264   DOD,  DOT. 
2,100  NSF. 

356   DOA,  DOD,  NSF 
1,816  DOC. 
1,110   DOI,  NSF. 
4,  398   DOC,  DOT,  NSF. 

937   DOC,  DOI,  NSF. 

Total    

  19,581  15,401 

15,  270 

Although  in  some  respects  the  National  Oceanographic  and  Atmospheric  Ad- 
ministration gathers  data  on  all  these  projects,  it  does  not  really  function  as  a 
lead  agency  or  exert  sufficient  direction,  coordination  or  control  over  the  civilian 
or  military  projects.  It  is  clear  from  the  second  chart,  furthermore,  that  consider- 
able overlap  and  possible  duplication  exists.  We  believe,  however,  that  in  a  field 
as  diverse  and  speculative  as  this,  a  greater  degree  of  centralization  is  desirable. 
This  same  recommendation  has  been  made  on  a  number  of  occasions  by  the  Na- 
tional Advisory  Committee  on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere: 

NACOA  finds  that,  although  we  appear  to  stand  on  the  threshold  of  practical 
weather  modification,  and  some  facets  are  operational,  in  other  applications  a 
sroat  deal  of  complex  research  still  needs  to  be  done.  Unless  the  scientific  man- 
power and  funding  are  better  directed,  we  assuredly  will  continue  to  make  very 
slow  progress  towards  weather  control.  NACOA  therefore  reiterates  its  recom- 
mendations of  last  year  that : 

"The  many  small  programs  in  weather  modification  now  scattered  widely 
through  the  Federal  agencies  be  focused  and  coordinated  under  NOAA's  head ; 
basic  cloud  physics  and  dynamics  be  given  higher  priority;  and  that  the  legal, 
social,  and  economic  impact  of  weather  modification  be  thoroughly  examined  and 
;appropriate  regulatory  and  licensing  legislation  be  sought."  (A  Refrort  to  the 
President  and  the  Congress,  NACOA.  June  29,  1973,  page  viii.) 

We  also  believe  it  is  particularly  important  that  any  such  coordination  should 
be  in  the  hands  of  a  civilian  agency;  indeed,  that  all  such  research  should  be 
conducted  by  civilian  agencies. 

Considerable  doubt  has  been  raised  in  the  past  over  the  nature  of  some  of  the 
research  conducted  by  the  Defense  Department  in  the  area  of  weather  modifica- 
tion. You  will  recall  the  not  too  successful  efforts  to  increase  rainfall  over  the 
Ho  Chi  Minh  Trail  several  years  ago  at  a  cost  of  $21. G  million.  We  have  grave 
doubts  about  the  merits  of  any  project  such  as  this,  but  we  are  also  concerned 
about  the  way  in  which  the  incident  was  handled  by  the  Government.  The  proj- 
ect was  at  first  flatly — and  repeatedly — denied  publicly  and  before  Congress 
by  the  Department  of  Defense,  but  the  basic  facts  were  ultimately  conceded  some 


505 


vears  later  by  former  Defense  Secretary  Laird  in  a  letter  to  the  Senate  forfagn 
Relations  Committee,  which  confirmed  the  allegations  that  had  been  made. 

Such  incidents  have  given  rise  to  continuing  concern  on  our  part  over  the  scope 
of  federal  research  and  development  on  environmental  and  weather  modifica- 
tion What  is  significant  about  these  incidents  is  that  they  continue  to  occur  in 
respect  to  Defense  Department  research,  even  though  DOD  asserts  such  research 
has  only  peaceful  applications,  such  as  airport  fog  dispersal.  If  this  is  the  case, 
then  it  would  seem  both  logical  and  appropriate  to  place  such  research  in  civilian 
agencies  where  it  can  be  carried  on  with  the  same  degree  of  precision  and  success, 
since  weapons'  applications  are  not  involved,  and  where  it  would  not  cause  new 
suspicions  about  the  real  nature  of  the  work. 

Weather  modification  is  a  field  of  great  potential,  promising  considerable  bene- 
fits to  agriculture  and  transportation,  to  mention  only  two  prime  areas  of  re- 
seach.  At  the  same  time  the  potential  military  applications  of  weather  modifica- 
tion research  are  serious.  Last  summer's  agreement  with  the  Soviet  Union  to  meet 
to  discuss  a  ban  on  weather  warfare  is  most  encouraging.  We  hope  that  in  the 
light  of  that  agreement,  you  will  be  able  to  give  favorable  consideration  to  our 
recommendations. 
Sincerely, 

Gilbert  Gude. 

Member  of  Congress. 
Claiborne  Pell, 

U.S.  Senator. 
Donald  M.  Fraser, 

Member  of  Congress. 

On  June  5,  we  received  the  following  response  from  Norman  E.  Ross,  Jr.,  As- 
sistant Director  of  the  Domestic  Council : 

The  White  House, 
Washington,  June  5, 1915. 

Hon.  Gilbert  Gude, 
House  of  Representatives, 
Washington,  D.C. 

Dear  Mr.  Gude  :  The  President  has  asked  me  to  respond  to  your  letter  of  April 
23,  1975,  in  which  you  recommended  a  coordinated  program  of  governmental  work 
in  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modification. 

A  considerable  amount  of  careful  thought  and  study  has  been  devoted  to  the 
subject  of  weather  modification  and  what  the  Federal  role  and,  in  particular,  the 
role  of  various  agencies  should  be  in  this  area.  As  a  result  of  this  study,  we  have- 
developed  a  general  strategy  for  addressing  weather  modification  efforts  which 
we  believe  provides  for  an  appropriate  level  of  coordination. 

For  the  most  part,  as  your  letter  points  out,  we  are  just  beginning  to  under- 
stand the  possibilities  for  weather  modification  and  the  complexities  that  are  in- 
volved. Inadvertent  modification  of  weather  and  environment  through  industrial 
development  is  indeed  a  prime  example. 

There  are  many  problems  generated  by  various  weather  phenomena  such  as 
loss  of  crops  through  hail  damage  and  destruction  of  property  caused  by  hurri- 
canes and  flooding.  In  many  cases  the  approaches  to  solving  the  problems 
may  or  may  not  be  best  met  through  weather  modification  techniques.  Other 
solutions  such  as  community  preparedness,  better  land  use  planning,  and  pro- 
tective measures  may  more  effectively  and  realistically  achieve  the  objectives. 

For  this  reason,  we  believe  that  the  agency  which  is  charged  with  a  particular 
national  problem  should  be  given  the  latitude  to  seek  the  best  approach  or  solu- 
tion to  the  problem.  In  some  instances  this  may  involve  a  form  of  weather  modi- 
fication, while  in  other  instances  other  approaches  may  be  more  appropriate. 

While  we  would  certainly  agree  that  some  level  of  coordination  of  weather 
modification  research  efforts  is  logical,  we  do  not  believe  that  a  program  under 
the  direction  of  any  one  single  agency's  leadership  is  either  necessary  or  de- 
sirable. We  have  found  from  our  study  that  the  types  of  scientific  research  con- 
ducted by  agencies  are  substantially  different  in  approach,  techniques,  and  type- 
of  equipment  employed,  depending  on  the  particular  weather  phenomena  beings 
addressed.  For  example,  there  is  very  little  in  common  between  hurricane  sup- 
pression and  attempting  to  increase  rain  or  snow.  Fog  dispersal  efforts  have  al- 
most nothing  in  common  with  any  other  weather  modification.  Each  type  of 
weather  modification  requires  a  different  form  of  program  management  and  there? 
are  few  common  threads  which  run  among  all  programs. 


.506 


To  tlie  extent  that  there  are  common  problems  and  solutions  among  the  pro- 
grams, the  Interagency  Committee  on  Atmosphere  Sciences  (ICAS)  is  bringing 
together  agency  representatives  who  are  involved  in  weather  modification  re- 
search, for  the  purpose  of  sharing  their  ideas  and  approaches  to  various  prob- 
lems. In  addition,  a  series  of  lead  agencies  have  been  established  to  concentrate 
efforts  in  particular  areas:  Interior  in  precipitation;  Agriculture  in  lightning 
suppression ;  Commerce  in  severe  storms,  including  hurricanes ;  NSF  in  hail  re- 
search :  and  Transportation  in  fog  suppression.  These  lead  roles  provide  for  co- 
ordination in  areas  with  common  characteristics  and  have  gone  a  long  way 
toward  eliminating  duplicative  efforts.  Although  more  than  one  agency  is  in- 
volved in  a  general  area  such  as  inadvertent  modification,  their  efforts  are  keyed 
toward  particular  objectives. 

I  hope  this  information  will  be  helpful  to  you  and  I  would  like  to  thank  you  for 
sharing  your  views  with  us.  We  would  be  happy  to  provide  you  any  additional 
information  you  may  need  concerning  current  efforts  in  the  weather  modification 
area. 

Sincerely, 

Norman  E.  Ross,  Jr., 
Assistant  Director,  Domestic  Council. 

The  administration's  response  is  disappointing  that  it  rejects  the  recommenda- 
tion of  a  lead  agency,  despite  the  fact  that  the  National  Advisory  Committee 
on  Oceans  and  Atmosphere  has  regularly  recommended  it.  The  reply  ignores 
completely  the  crucial  second  point  of  military  involvement  in  weather  modifica- 
tion research.  I  commented  on  this  problem  in  some  detail  in  my  testimony  of 
September  24,  1974,  before  the  Foreign  Affairs  Subcommittee  on  International 
Organizations  and  Movements : 

"DANGERS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  CONTROL 

'•Why  should  we  be  so  alarmed  about  a  technique  that  is  not  nearly  as  lethal  as 
other  forms  of  warfare?  First,  there  are  distinct  control  and  command  problems 
associated  with  geophysical  warfare  and  weather  modification  in  particular.  We 
simply  do  not  have  effective  short  or  long  term  control  over  the  climates  of  the 
world.  We  can  create  certain  disturbances,  but  as  civilian  experiments  have 
shown,  control  is  not  precise.  In  a  military  environment,  control  over  the  results 
of  weather  experimentation  is  even  more  uncertain  in  respect  to  military  targets, 
and  there  is  practically  no  hope  of  preventing  military  efforts  from  spilling  over 
into  civilian  life  with  devastating  effect,  particularly  in  developing  agricultural 
countries.  Here,  wind  changes,  rainfall  changes,  or  even  changes  in  the  composi- 
tion of  rain  could  seriously  disrupt  the  livelihood  of  most  of  the  country's  citizens 
and  create  severe  food  supply  problems,  all  far  distant  from  the  chosen  military 
target.  This  is  partly  due  to  the  so-called  downwind  effect,  carrying  weather 
changes  with  weather  movements.  But  weather  unpredictability — enhanced  by 
modification  efforts  themselves — may  make  it  impossible  to  determine  where 
'downwind'  will  be  at  any  given  time.  This  means  that  the  use  of  weather  modi- 
fication is  inevitably  indiscriminate.  We  cannot  flood  only  military  targets  or 
cause  drought  in  areas  producing  only  military  rations.  The  technology  will  be 
used  against  people  regardless  of  their  uniform  or  occupation  and  will  inevitably 
strike  civilians  harder  than  nearby  military  objectives. 

•"The  command  problem  is  no  less  acute.  Since  the  technology  to  date  doe>  not 
involve  great  eXpense  or  sophisticated  equipment,  it  is  not  difficult  to  imagine  the 
use  of  weather  modification  by  many  different  military  subunits.  In  fact,  there 
have  been  reports  that  we  have  trained  the  South  Vietnamese  to  use  weather 
modification.  There  are  no  double-key  sating  mechanisms  here,  no  exclusive 
possession  as  with  nuclear  weapons. 

"DANGERS  OF  WEATHER  MODIFICATION — IDENTIFICATION*  AM)  DETECTION 

•"These  issues  of  command  and  control  highlight  another  disturbing  characteris- 
tic of  weather  modification,  the  difficulty  of  detection.  Unlike  other  weapons,  it 
may  be  possible  to  initiate  military  weather  modification  projects  without  being 
detected.  In  other  words,  the  military  results  may  not  be  visibly  tied  to  the  initiat- 
ing party.  This  raises  the  possibility  of  the  clandestine  use  of  geophysical  warfare 
where  a  country  does  not  know  if  it  has  been  attacked.  The  uncertainty  of  this 
situation,  the  fear  of  not  knowing  how  another  country  may  be  altering  your 


507 


climate  is  highly  destabilizing.  This  feeding  of  national  paranoia — a  pervading 
suspicion  of  the  motives  and  actions  of  a  neighboring  country — could  well  be 
amplified  into  the  laying  of  blame  for  any  adverse  climate  conditions  or  weather 
disasters  on  one's  neighbors. 

"This  was  clearly  brought  home  by  the  recent  admission  of  the  Department  of 
Defense  that  it  had  indeed  been  involved  in  weather  modification  activities  in 
Southeast  Asia  from  1967  to  1972,  even  at  a  time  when  Department  witnesses 
were  denying  such  involvement  in  their  congressional  testimony. 

"In  a  January  28,  1974,  letter  to  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Committee, 
former  Defense  Secretary  Laird  corrected  his  testimony  of  April  18,  1972,  in 
which  he  stated.  'We  have  never  engaged  in  that  type  of  activity  over  North 
Vietnam.'  Laird  admitted  that  just  such  activities  were  conducted  over  North 
Vietnam  in  1967  and  1968.  It  was  clearly  one  of  the  most  useless  programs  ever 
conceived  by  the  Government.  This  rainmaking  effort  accomplished  nothing  except 
washing  $21.6  million  down  the  drain,  and  it  was  undertaken  with  no  thought 
as  to  the  very  dangerous  situations  which  could  evolve  from  such  a  policy. 

''effects  of  weather  modification  research 

"There  is  no  question  that  much  valuable  research  is  now  being  done  under  the 
heading  of  weather  modification.  Airport  fog  dispersal  operations,  cloud  seeding 
in  farm  areas  threatened  by  drought,  efforts  to  increase  the  winter  snow  pack, 
and  experiments  in  hurricane  control  are  all  legitimate  scientific  efforts  that 
can  meet  important  domestic  and  international  needs.  This  work  into  peaceful 
applications  of  environmental  modification  technology  should  continue.  Un- 
fortunately, Pentagon  involvement  in  weather  modification  research — whether 
classified  or  for  peaceful  purposes — has  serious  consequences  for  the  U.S.  civilian 
scientific  community,  the  American  public,  and  the  international  community. 

"Geophysical  warfare,  to  use  a  figure  of  speech,  can  poison  the  atmosphere 
surrounding  legitimate  international  programs  such  as  the  global  atmospheric 
research  program,  the  international  hydrological  decade  and  meteorology  in 
general.  We  have  already  seen  that  it  caused  the  U.S.  delegation  at  the  Stock- 
holm Conference  to  water  down  a  recommendation  on  climate  changes.  The  po- 
tential for  embarrassment  is  great. 

"Our  scientific  community  could  come  under  suspicion  or  attack  at  these  inter- 
national meetings.  The  fine  work  and  trust  built  up  over  the  years  by  our  excel- 
lent atmospheric  scientists  could  be  dispelled  in  one  stroke  of  Pentagon  experi- 
mentation. 

•'But  it  is  not  only  our  scientists  who  lose  credibility — it  is  the  Defense  Depart- 
ment itself.  Through  its  involvement  in  research  which  may  have  military  appli- 
cations, even  though  it  is  intended  for  peaceful  purposes,  the  Pentagon  has  laid 
itself  open  to  allegations  of  a  variety  of  clandestine  activities. 

"Two  cases  will  illustrate  the  point.  The  Defense  Department  engages  in  con- 
siderable medical  research,  some  of  which  is  related  exclusively  to  military  needs, 
while  some  parallel  research  carried  out  by  civilian  institutions.  The  Navy,  for 
example,  has  had  a  research  unit  in  Egypt  studying  equatorial  diseases  for  many 
years.  By  conducting  such  research  'in-house,'  so  to  speak,  instead  of  obtaining 
it  through  civilian  research  agencies,  the  Navy  leaves  itself  open  to  charges 
that  it  is  actually  studying  or  developing  germ  warfare  or  the  like.  As  unfounded 
as  such  charges  may  be.  they  are  very  difficult  to  combat,  especially  in  the  cur- 
rent climate  of  suspicion  about  many  Pentagon  activities.  Yet.  there  is  no  reason 
why  this  kind  of  research  could  not  be  conducted  by  the  civilian  agencies  of 
Government  and  its  results  made  available  to  the  Defense  Department.  In  cases 
where  Defense  required  information  on  subjects  not  currently  under  investiga- 
tion, it  could  levy  requirements  on  the  National  Science  Foundation  which  would 
in  turn  conduct  or  contract  for  the  needed  research,  thus  reducing  the  opportu- 
nities for  controversy  to  develop,  controversy  which  might  itself  hamper  research, 
especially  abroad. 

"In  the  area  of  weather  modification.  I  have  been  assured  that  Air  Force  interest 
in  these  techniques  is  limited  to  developing  methods  for  airfield  fog  dispersal  or 
suppression  and  other  life-saving  measures.  These  techniques  are  just  as  im- 
portant to  business  and  civil  aviation  and  the  general  public,  and  there  is  no 
reason  why  such  research  cannot  be  conducted  by  a  civilian  agency. 

"As  a  general  principle,  therefore.  I  would  urge  that  wherever  an  adequate 
scientific  base  exists  for  conducting  specific  types  of  applied  research  outside 
of  the  Department  of  Defense  and  associated  agencies,  if  would  be  wise  policy 


508 


to  conduct  all  such  research  through  non-defense  agencies,  such  as  NOAA,  NIH,. 
XSF  or  private  institutions.  In  addition  to  helping  resolve  Pentagon  credibility 
problems,  such  a  procedure  will  tend  to  reduce  duplication  of  effort  and  may 
therefore  produce  some  cost  savings. 

"Thus,  although  the  subject  of  this  hearing  is  an  international  treaty  banning 
the  use  of  weather  modification  techniques  as  weapons,  it  is  important  that  we 
gjo  beyond  that  and  deal  directly  with  the  development  of  such  research  within 
our  own  Government,  so  as  to  clearly  divorce  all  weather  modification  activities 
from  the  military  and  leave  no  doubt  that  American  interest  in  this  field  is 
strictly  peaceful  and  humanitarian." 

This  administration  and  its  predecessor  have  made  progress  toward  an  inter- 
national treaty  banning  the  use  of  weather  modification  as  a  weapon  of  war, 
but  neither  administration  has  really  understood  the  important  link  between 
banning  weather  warfare  and  taking  weather  modification  research  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  military.  We  cannot  credibly  negotiate  a  weather  warfare  treaty  at 
the  same  time  we  are  funding  classified  Defense  Department  research  projects  in 
weather  modification.  Since  the  Defense  Department  has  maintained  that  its  re- 
search only  involves  peaceful  applications,  it  is  difficult  to  understand  why  such 
research  cannot  be  placed  in  civilian  hands.  The  administration  is  unwilling  to 
move  in  that  direction,  and  legislative  action  may  be  necessary.  I  am  in  the 
process  of  preparing  just  that,  and  I  plan  shortly  to  submit  my  proposals  for 
House  consideration. 


Appendix  B 


Department  of  Defense  Statement  on  Position  on 
Weather  Modification 

Position  on  Weather  Modification  1 

Based  on  extant  theories  and  demonstrated  technology,  weather  modification 
has  little  utility  as  a  weapon  of  war.  Conventional  arms  are  more  effective 
instruments  of  warfare.  While  weather  modification  experiments  in  Vietnam 
demonstrated  the  technical  ability  to  increase  rainfall,  its  military  payoff  was 
nil.  Unless  there  is  a  major  scientific  breakthrough  which  would  allow  the  use 
of  weather  modification  as  a  weapon,  we  see  little  value  in  continued  weather 
modification  development  toward  this  end.  However,  DoD  must  continue  to 
have  the  option  to  conduct  reesarch  and  development  to  exploit  emerging  tech- 
nology and  to  avoid  technological  surprise. 

Weather  modification  can  enhance  the  effectiveness  of  conventional  weapons, 
particularly  aircraft  and  helicopter  forces.  The  primary  impediment  to  aircraft 
operations  is  the  visibility  at  airfields  and  visibility  over  target.  The  DoD  should 
pursue  technology  to  dissipate  fog  and  clouds  for  the  purposes  of  increasing 
visibility,  and  thus  conventional  weapons  effectiveness.  We  employ  operationally 
cold  fog  dissipators  at  those  military  airfields  affected  by  cold  fog  and  fund  a 
significant  development  program  in  airfield  warm  fog  dissipation.  At  the  same 
time,  we  continue  to  work  on  technology  to  clear  fog  and  clouds  in  a  battlefield 
area. 

The  future  direction  of  the  DoD  weather  modification  program  is  influenced 
not  only  by  our  perceptions  of  the  usefulness  of  the  technology,  but  also  by  the 
Environmental  Modification  Convention.  The  Environmental  Modification  Con- 
vention constrains  the  use  of  military  weather  modification  activities  to  those 
not  having  widespread,  long-lasting,  or  severe  effects.  The  effect  of  the  Environ- 
mental Modification  Convention,  when  superimposed  on  our  present  perceptions 
of  technology,  is  to  further  devalue  the  development  of  weather  modification 
as  a  weapon  of  war.  As  a  result,  our  present  efforts  are  directed  solely  at  fog 
and  cloud  dissipation. 

Insights  into  the  future  directions  and  potential  of  weather  modification  will 
derive  from  fundamental  research  in  atmospheric  physics  and  atmospheric  proc- 
esses, and  not  from  applied  technology  experiments  in  weather  modification. 
DoD  will  continue  to  support  a  vigorous  program  in  basic  research  in  cloud 
physics  and  atmospheric  dynamics.  We  are  jointly  funding  with  NASA  experi- 
ments to  be  conducted  in  the  NASA  cloud  physics  laboratory  to  be  flown  on  the 
space  shuttle.  DoD  laboratories  and  contract  programs  fund  a  broad  spectrum 
of  fundamental  research  into  the  atmosphere. 


1  Provided  April  5,  1978,  by  Col.  Elbert  W.  Friday,  Office  of  tbe  Under  Secretary  of  De- 
fense for  Research  and  Engineering,  in  a  briefing  to  representatives  of  the  Weather  Modi- 
fication Advisory  Board  and  from  several  Federal  agencies. 

(509) 


34-857—79  35 


Appendix  C 


Text  of  United  Xatioxs  Convention  ox-  the  Prohibition  of  Mili- 
tary or  Axy  Other  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification 
Techniques 

Text  of  Resolution  1 

The  General  Assembly. 

Recalling  its  resolutions  3264  (XXIX)  of  9  December  1974  and  3475  (XXX) 
of  11  December  1975, 

Recalling  its  resolution  1722  (XVI)  of  20  December  1961,  in  which  it  recognized 
that  all  States  have  a  deep  interest  in  disarmament  and  arms  control  negotiations, 

Determined  to  avert  the  potential  dangers  of  military  or  any  other  hostile  use 
of  environmental  modification  techniques, 

Convinced  that  broad  adherence  to  a  convention  on  the  prohibition  of  such 
action  would  contribute  to  the  cause  of  strengthening  peace  and  averting  the 
threat  of  war, 

Noting  with  satisfaction  that  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarmament 
lias  completed  and  transmitted  to  the  General  Assembly,  in  the  report  of  its 
work  in  1976,  the  text  of  a  draft  Convention  on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any 
Other  Hostile  Use  of  Environmental  Modification  Techniques, 

Noting  further  that  the  Convention  is  intended  to  prohibit  effectively  military 
or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  in  order  to 
eliminate  the  dangers  to  mankind  from  such  use, 

Bearing  in  mind  that  draft  agreements  on  disarmament  and  arms  control 
measures  submitted  to  the  General  Assembly  by  the  Conference  of  the  Committee 
on  Disarmament  should  be  the  result  of  a  process  of  effective  negotiations  and 
that  such  instruments  should  duly  take  into  account  the  views  and  interests  of  all 
States  so  that  they  can  be  joined  by  the  widest  possible  number  of  countries, 

Bearing  in  mind  that  article  VII  of  the  Convention  makes  provision  for  a  con- 
ference to  review  the  operation  of  the  Convention  five  years  after  its  entry  into 
force,  with  a  view  to  ensuring  that  its  purposes  and  provisions  are  being  realized. 

Also  bearing  in  mind  all  relevant  documents  and  negotiating  records  of  the 
Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarmament  on  the  discussion  of  the  draft 
Convention. 

Convinced  that  the  Convention  should  not  affect  the  use  of  environmental  modi- 
fication techniques  for  peaceful  purposes,  which  could  contribute  to  the  preserva- 
tion and  improvement  of  the  environment  for  the  benefit  of  present  and  future 
generations, 

Convinced  that  the  Convention  will  contribute  to  the  realization  of  the  purposes 
and  principles  of  the  Charter  of  the  United  Nations, 

Anxious  that  during  its  1977  session  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Dis- 
armament should  concentrate  on  urgent  negotiations  on  disarmament  and  arms 
limitation  measures, 

1.  Refers  the  Convention  on  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile 
Use  of  Environmental  Modification  Techniques,  the  text  of  which  is  annexed  to 
the  present  resolution,  to  all  States  for  their  consideration,  signature  and 
ratification  : 

2.  Requests  the  Secretary-General  as  depositary  of  the  Convention,  to  open  it 
for  signature  and  ratification  at  the  earliest  possible  date  : 


1  A/RES/31/72  (text  from  U.N.  floe.  A/31/382,  report  of  the  First  Committee  on  agenda 
''•'■!•'  A Convention  on  the  prohibition  of  military  or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental 
modification  techniques-)  ;  adopted  by  the  committee  on  Dee.  3  by  a  recorded  vote  of  89 
fTT.S.)  to  11,  with  2."»  abstentions,  and  by  the  Assembly  on  Dee.  10  by  a  recorded  vote  of  96 
(V.S.  i  to  S.  with  :;0  ahstentions. 


(510) 


511 


3.  Expresses  its  hope  for  the  widest  possible  adherence  to  the  Convention ; 

4.  Galls  upon  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarmament,  without 
prejudice  to  the  priorities  established  in  its  programme  of  work,  to  keep  under 
review  the  problem  of  effectively  averting  the  dangers  of  military  or  any  other 
hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  ; 

5.  Requests  the  Secretary-General  to  transmit  to  the  Conference  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Disarmament  all  documents  relating  to  the  discussion  by  the  General 
Assembly  at  its  thirty-first  session  of  the  question  of  the  prohibition  of  military 
or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques. 

Annex 

Convention  ox  the  Prohibition  of  Military  or  Any  Other  Hostile  Use  of 
Environmental  Modification  Techniques 

The  States  Parties  to  this  Convention, 

(lidded  by  the  interest  of  consolidating  peace,  and  wishing  to  contribute  to  the 
cause  of  halting  the  arms  race,  and  of  bringing  about  general  and  complete  dis- 
armament under  strict  and  effective  international  control,  and  of  saving  mankind 
from  the  danger  of  using  new  means  of  warfare, 

Determined  to  continue  negotiations  with  a  view  to  achieving  effective  prog- 
ress towards  further  measures  in  the  field  of  disarmament, 

Recognizing  that  scientific  and  technical  advances  may  open  new  possibilities 
with  respect  to  modification  of  the  environment, 

Recalling  the  Declaration  of  the  United  Nations  Conference  on  the  Human 
Environment,  adopted  at  Stockholm  on  16  June  1972, 

Realizing  that  the  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  for  peaceful 
purposes  could  improve  the  interrelationship  of  man  and  nature  and  contribute 
to  the  preservation  and  improvement  of  the  environment  for  the  benefit  of  pres- 
ent and  future  generations, 

Recognising,  however,  that  military  or  any  other  hostile  use  of  such  techniques 
Could  have  effects  extremely  harmful  to  human  welfare. 

Desiring  to  prohibit  effectively  military  or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environ- 
mental modification  techniques  in  order  to  eliminate  the  dangers  to  mankind 
from  such  use.  and  affirming  their  willingness  to  work  towards  the  achievement 
of  this  objective. 

Desiring  also  to  contribute  to  the  strengthening  of  trust  among  nations  and 
to  further  improvement  of  the  international  situation  in  accordance  with  the 
purposes  and  principles  of  the  Charter  of  the  United  Nations, 

Have  agreed  as  follows  : 

Article  I 

1.  Each  State  Party  to  this  Convention  undertakes  not  to  engage  in  military 
or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  having  wide- 
spread, long-lasting  or  severe  effects  as  the  means  of  destruction,  damage  or 
injury  to  any  other  State  Party. 

2.  Each  State  Party  to  this  Convention  undertakes  not  to  assist,  encourage 
or  induce  any  State,  group  of  States  or  international  organization  to  engage  in 
activities  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  paragraph  1  of  this  article. 

Article  II 

As  used  in  article  I.  the  term  "environmental  modification  techniques''  refers 
to  any  technique  for  changing — through  the  deliberate  manipulation  of  natural 
processes — the  dynamics,  composition  or  structure  of  the  earth,  including  its 
biota,  lithosphere,  hydrosphere,  and  atmosphere,  or  of  outer  space. 

Article  III 

1.  The  provisions  of  this  Convention  shall  not  hinder  the  use  of  environmental 
modification  techniques  for  peaceful  purposes  and  shall  be  without  prejudice  to 
generally  recognized  principles  and  applicable  rules  of  international  law  con- 
cerning such  use. 

2.  The  States  Parties  to  this  Convention  undertake  to  facilitate,  and  have  the 
right  to  participate  in.  the  fullest  possible  exchange  of  scientific  and  techno- 
logical information  on  the  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques  for 
peaceful  purposes.  States  Parties  in  a  position  to  do  so  shall  contribute,  alone 


512 


or  together  with  other  States  or  international  organizations,  to  international 
economic  and  scientific  co-operation  in  the  preservation,  improvement,  and 
peaceful  utilization  of  the  environment,  with  due  consideration  for  the  needs  of 
the  developing  areas  of  the  world. 

Article  IV 

Each  State  Party  to  this  Convention  undertakes  to  take  any  measures  it  con- 
siders necessary  in  accordance  with  its  constitutional  processes  to  prohibit  and 
prevent  any  activity  in  violation  of  the  provisions  of  the  Convention  anywhere 
under  its  jurisdiction  or  control. 

Article  V 

1.  The  States  Parties  to  this  Convention  undertake  to  consult  one  another  and 
to  co-operate  in  solving  any  problems  which  may  arise  in  relation  to  the  objec- 
tives of,  or  in  the  application  of  the  provisions  of,  the  Convention.  Consultation 
and  co-operation  pursuant  to  this  article  may  also  be  undertaken  through  appro- 
priate international  procedures  within  the  framework  of  the  United  Nations  and 
in  accordance  with  its  Charter.  These  international  procedures  may  include  the 
services  of  appropriate  international  organizations,  as  well  as  of  a  consultative 
committee  of  experts  as  provided  for  in  paragraph  2  of  this  article. 

2.  For  the  purposes  set  forth  in  paragraph  1  of  this  article,  the  Depositary 
shall,  within  one  month  of  the  receipt  of  a  request  from  any  State  Party,  con- 
vene a  consultative  committee  of  experts.  Any  State  Party  may  appoint  an 
expert  to  this  committee  whose  functions  and  rules  of  procedure  are  set  out  in 
the  annex,  which  constitutes  an  integral  part  of  this  Convention.  The  commit- 
tee shall  transmit  to  the  Depositary  a  summary  of  its  findings  of  fact,  incorpo- 
rating all  views  and  information  presented  to  the  committee  during  its  pro- 
ceedings. The  Depositary  shall  distribute  the  summary  to  all  States  Parties. 

3.  Any  State  Party  to  this  Convention  which  has  reasons  to  believe  that  any 
other  State  Party  is  acting  in  breach  of  obligations  deriving  from  the  provisions 
of  the  Convention  may  lodge  a  complaint  with  the  Security  Council  of  the  United 
Nations.  Such  a  complaint  should  include  all  relevant  information  as  well  as  all 
possible  evidence  supporting  its  validity. 

4.  Each  State  Party  to  this  Convention  undertakes  to  co-operate  in  carrying 
out  any  investigation  which  the  Security  Council  may  initiate,  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  the  Charter  of  the  United  Nations,  on  the  basis  of  the 
complaint  received  by  the  Council.  The  Security  Council  shall  inform  the  States 
Parties  to  the  Convention  of  the  results  of  the  investigation. 

5.  Each  State  Party  to  this  Convention  undertakes  to  provide  or  support  assist- 
ance, in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Charter  of  the  United  Nations, 
to  any  Party  to  the  Convention  which  so  requests,  if  the  Security  Council  decides 
that  such  Party  has  been  harmed  or  is  likely  to  be  harmed  as  a  result  of  violation 
of  the  Convention. 

Article  VI 

1.  Any  State  Party  may  proposed  amendments  to  this  Convention.  The  text 
of  any  proposed  amendment  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Depositary,  who  shall 
promptly  circulate  it  to  all  States  Parties. 

2.  An  amendment  shall  enter  into  force  for  all  States  Parties  which  have  ac- 
cepted it,  upon  the  deposit  with  the  Depositary  of  instruments  of  acceptance  by 
a  majority  of  States  Parties.  Thereafter  it  shall  enter  into  force  for  any  re- 
maining State  Party  on  the  date  of  deposit  of  its  instrument  of  acceptance. 

Article  VII 

This  Convention  shall  be  of  unlimited  duration. 

Article  VIII 

1.  Five  years  after  the  entry  into  force  of  this  Convention,  a  conference  of  the 
State  Parties  to  the  Convention  shall  be  convened  by  the  Depositary  at  Geneva. 
The  conference  shall  review  the  operation  of  the  Convention  with  a  view  to  en- 
suring thfit  its  purposes  and  provisions  are  being  realized,  and  shall  in  particular 
examine  the  effectiveness  of  the  provisions  of  article  T.  paragraph  1.  in  eliminat- 
ing the  dangers  of  military  or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification 
techniques. 


513 


2.  At  intervals  of  not  less  than  five  years  thereafter,  a  majority  of  the  States 
Parties  to  this  Convention  may  obtain,  by  submitting  a  proposal  to  this  effect  to 
the  Depositary,  the  convening  of  a  conference  with  the  same  objectives. 

3.  If  no  review  conference  has  been  convened  pursuant  to  paragraph  2  of  this 
article  within  10  years  following  the  conclusion  of  a  previous  review  conference, 
the  Depositary  shall  solicit  the  views  of  all  States  Parties  to  this  Convention  on 
the  holding  of  such  a  conference.  If  one  third  or  10  of  the  States  Parties,  which- 
ever number  is  less,  respond  affirmatively,  the  Depositary  shall  take  immediate 
steps  to  convene  the  conference. 

Article  IX 

1.  This  Convention  shall  be  open  to  all  States  for  signature.  Any  State  which 
does  not  sign  the  Convention  before  its  entry  into  force  in  accordance  with  para- 
graph 3  of  this  article  may  accede  to  it  at  any  time. 

2.  This  Convention  shall  be  subject  to  ratification  by  signatory  States.  Instru- 
ments of  ratification  and  instruments  of  accession  shall  be  deposited  with  the 
Secretary-General  of  the  United  Nations. 

3.  This  Convention  shall  enter  into  force  upon  the  deposit  with  the  Depositary 
of  instruments  of  ratification  by  20  Governments  in  accordance  with  paragraph 
2  of  this  article. 

4.  For  those  States  whose  instruments  of  ratification  or  accession  are  deposited 
after  the  entry  into  force  of  this  Convention,  it  shall  enter  into  force  on  the  date 
of  the  deposit  of  their  instruments  of  ratification  or  accession. 

5.  The  Depositary  shall  promptly  inform  all  signatory  and  acceding  States  of 
the  date  of  each  signature,  the  date  of  deposit  of  each  instrument  of  ratification 
oi^  of  accession  and  the  date  of  the  entry  into  force  of  this  Convention  and  of 
any  amendments  thereto,  as  well  as  of  the  receipt  of  other  notices. 

6.  This  Convention  shall  be  registered  by  the  Depositary  in  accordance  with 
Article  102  of  the  Charter  of  the  United  Nations. 

Article  X 

This  Convention  of  which  the  Arabic,  Chinese,  English,  French,  Russian,  and 
Spanish  texts  are  equally  authentic,  shall  be  deposited  with  the  Secretary-General 
of  the  United  Nations  who  shall  send  certified  copies  thereof  to  the  Govern- 
ments of  the  signatory  and  acceding  States. 

In  Witness  Whereof,  the  undersigned,  duly  authorized  thereto,  have  signed 
this  Convention. 

Done  at  On  

Annex  to  the  Convention 
Consultative  Committee  of  Experts 

1.  The  Consultative  Committee  of  Experts  shall  undertake  to  make  appro- 
priate findings  of  fact  and  provide  expert  views  relevant  to  any  problem  raised 
pursuant  to  article  V,  paragraph  1.  of  this  Convention  by  the  State  Party  re- 
questing the  convention  of  the  Committee. 

2.  The  work  of  the  Consultative  Committee  of  Experts  shall  be  organized  in 
such  a  way  as  to  permit  it  to  perforin  the  functions  set  forth  in  paragraph  1  of 
this  annex.  The  Committee  shall  decide  procedural  questions  relative  to  the 
organization  of  its  work,  where  possible  by  consensus,  but  otherwise  by  a  ma- 
jority of  those  present  and  voting.  There  shall  be  no  voting  on  matters  of 
substance. 

3.  The  Depositary  or  his  representative  shall  serve  as  the  Chairman  of  the 
Committee. 

4.  Each  expert  may  lie  assisted  at  meetings  by  one  or  more  advisers. 

5.  Each  expert  shall  have  the  right,  through  the  Chairman,  to  request  from 
States,  and  from  international  organizations,  such  information  and  assistance 
as  the  expert  considers  desirable  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  Committee's 
work. 


Appendix  D 


State  Statutes  Concerning  Weather  Modification 

Twenty-nine  States  were  found  which  have  some  type  of  statute  discussing 
weather  modification.  These  state  statutes  were  found  by  an  examination  of  the 
indices  to  the  state  codes  under  the  topics  weather  modification,  climate  control 
and  cloud  seeding.  Statutes  which  have  been  repealed  are  not  included.1 

The  following  chart  divides  the  types  of  weather  modification  statutes  into 
three  main  categories :  comprehensive,  licensing  and  other.  The  comprehensive 
category  would  include  those  statutes  which  include  provisions  relating  not  only 
to  licensing  but  also  to  general  policy,  liability,  etc.  State  statutes  put  in  the 
licensing  category  are  entirely,  or  almost  entirely,  concerned  with  the  licensing 
of  weather  modifiers.  The  "other"  category  would  include  States  like  Hawaii 
which  discuss  weather  modification  in  some  manner  but  have  neither  a  com- 
prehensive statute  nor  one  concerning  licensing.  States  for  which  no  provisions 
concerning  weather  modification  were  found  contain  a  notation  of  "no  provisions" 
on  the  chart.  The  exact  text  of  those  provisions  follows  the  chart. 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  most  cases  the  State  codes  were  current  through 
the  1976  sessions,  however,  in  some  cases  the  most  current  material  available 
was  from  the  1975  sessions. 


Types  of  weather  modification  statutes 


States  Comprehensive  Licensing  Other 


Alabama   No  provisions       

Alaska    No  provisions..   

Arizona  Arizona   Rev.  Stat.  §§45- 

2401—45-2405. 

Arkansas.   No  provisions  

California.   California  Water  Code  §§  400-  

415;  §  235.  California  Gov- 
ernment Code  §  53063.  Cal- 
ifornia Pub.  Res.  Code 
§  5093.36. 

Colorado  Colorado  Rev.  Stat.  §§  36-20-  

101—36-20-126. 

Connecticut    Connecticut  Gen.  Stat,  Ann* 

§  24-5-24-8. 

Delaware.   No  provisions   

Florida   Florida  Stat.  Ann.  §§  403.281- 

403.411. 

Georgia   No  provisions  

Hawaii          Hawaii  Rev.  Stat.  §174-5(8). 

Idaho  Idaho  Code  §§  22-3201-22- 

3202;  22-4301-22-4302. 

Illinois   Illinois  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  146  3/4,  

§§  1-32. 

Indiana   No  provisions   

Iowa   Iowa  Code  Ann.  §§361.1- 

361.7. 

Kansas  Kansas  Stat.  §§  19  212f;  82a-  

1401-82a-1425. 

Kentucky   No  provisions..  

Louisiana    Louisiana   Rev.  Stat.  Ann. 

§§  2201-2208. 

Maine...   No  provisions.  

Maryland  No  provisions  

Massachusetts   No  provisions  

Michigan   No  provisions.  

Minnesota    Minnesota  Stat.  Ann.    42.01-  .  ...  .   

42.14. 

Mississippi   No  provisions..  

Missouri   No  provisions    

Montana...   Montana   Rev.  Codes  Ann.   

§§  89  310—89  331. 

Nebraska   Nevada  Rev.  Stat.  §§  2  2401—  

2  2449;  81  829.45. 


1  This  search  w.-is  completed  In  May  ii>77. 

(514) 


515 


Types  of  weather  modification  statutes 


States  Comprehensive  Licensing  Other 

Nevada   Nevada  Rev.  Stat.  §§  544.010-   

544.240;  244.190. 

New  Hampshire    -  New   Hampshire   Rev.  Stat. 

Ann.  §  432:1. 

New  Jersey  No  provisions     

New  Mexico  New  Mexico  Stat.  Ann.  §§  75-   .  

37-1-75-31-15. 

New  York.   New  York  Gen.  Mun.  Law 

§  119-p. 

North  Carolina  No  provisions  .     

North  Dakota.  North   Dakota   Cent.  Code   

§§  2-07-01-2-07-13;  37- 

17.1-15;  58-03-07. 

Ohio.   No  provisions..    

Oklahoma  Oklahoma  Stat.  Ann.,  title  2,    

§§  1401-1432. 

Oregon  Oregon  Rev.  Stat.  §§  558  010-  

558.990;  451.010;  451.420. 
Pennsylvania  Pennsylvania  Stat.  Ann  ,  title    

3,  §§  1101-1118. 

Rhode  Island  No  provisions       

South  Carolina  No  provisions..    

South  Dakota.  South  Dakota  Compiled  Laws    

Ann.  §§  38-9-1—38-9-22; 

1-40-8;  10-12-18. 

Tennessee  No  provisions  _  

Texas   Texas  Water  Code,  title  2,    

§§14.001-14.112;  Texas 

Civil    Code,   title  120A. 

§  6889-7(16). 

Utah      Utah  Code  Ann.  §§73-15-3— 

73-15-8. 

Vermont   No  provisions  

Virginia   No  provisions    

Washington  Washington  Rev.  Code  Ann  

§§  43.37.010-43.37.200;  43. 

27A.080(6);  43.27A.180(1). 
West  Virginia  West  Virginia  Code  §§  29  2B-  

1-29-2B-15. 

Wisconsin...  Wisconsin  Stat.  Ann.  §  195.40. 

Wyoming  Wyoming  Stat.  §§  10-4—10-6, 

§§  9-267-9-276. 


Arizona 

Ariz.  Rev.  Stat.  §§  45-2401-45-2405 

§  45-2401.    License  required 

No  person  or  corporation,  other  than  the  United  States  and  its  administrative 
agencies  or  the  state  shall,  without  having  first  received  a  license  from  the 
Arizona  water  commission,  conduct  any  weather  control  or  cloud  modification 
operations  or  attempt  artificially  to  produce  rainfall.  As  amended  Laws  1971, 
Ch.  49,  §  25. 

§  45-2402.    Application  for  license 

Any  individual  or  corporation  who  proposes  to  operate  weather  control  or  cloud 
modification  projects  or  attempts  to  artificially  induce  rainfall  shall,  before 
engaging  in  any  such  operation,  make  application  to  the  Arizona  water  commis- 
sion for  a  license  to  engage  in  the  particular  weather  control  or  cloud  modification 
operation  contemplated.  As  amended  Laws  1971,  Ch.  49,  §  26. 

Effective  April  13, 1971. 
§  45-2403.    Application  fee;  statement  accompanying  application 

At  the  time  of  applying  for  the  license,  the  applicant  shall  pay  to  the  Arizona 
water  commission  a  fee  of  one  hundred  dollars,  and  shall  file  an  application  in 
the  form  prescribed  by  the  Arizona  water  commission  and  furnish  a  statement 
showing  : 

1.  The  name  and  address  of  the  applicant. 

2.  The  names  of  the  operating  personnel,  and  if  unincorporated  all  individuals 
connected  with  the  organization,  or  if  a  corporation  the  names  of  each  of  the 
officers  and  directors  thereof,  together  with  the  address  of  each. 


516 


3.  The  scientific  qualifications  of  all  operating  or  supervising  personnel. 

4.  A  statement  of  all  other  contracts  completed  or  in  process  of  completion  at 
the  time  the  application  is  made,  giving  the  names  and  addresses  of  the  persons 
to  whom  the  services  were  furnished  and  the  areas  in  which  such  operations  have 
been  or  are  being  conducted. 

5.  Methods  of  operation  the  licensee  will  use  and  the  description  of  the  aircraft, 
ground  and  meteorological  services  to  be  utilized. 

6.  Names  of  the  contracting  parties  within  the  state,  including : 

(a)  The  area  to  be  served. 

(b)  The  months  in  which  operations  will  be  conducted. 

(c)  The  dates  when  evaluations  will  be  submitted.  As  amended  Laws  1071. 
Ch.  49,  §  27. 

§  45-2404-  Reports  required  from  licensees;  failure  to  file;  revocation  of  license 
Each  licensee  shall  within  ninety  days  after  conclusion  of  any  weather  control 
or  cloud  modification  project,  file  with  the  Arizona  water  commission  a  final 
evaluation  of  the  project.  Each  six  months  during  the  operation  of  any  project 
which  has  not  been  completed,  each  licensee  shall  file  a  report  evaluating  the 
operations  for  the  preceding  six  months  in  the  project.  Failure  to  file  such  reports 
constitutes  grounds  for  immediate  revocation  of  the  license.  As  amended  Laws 
1071,  Ch.  49,  §  28. 

§  45-2405.    Equipment  license;  fee;  application;  reports  required;  revocation  of 
license 

A.  Any  individual  or  corporation  engaging  in  manufacturing,  selling  or  offering 
for  sale,  leasing  or  offering  to  lease,  licensing  or  offering  to  license  equipment  and 
supplies  designed  for  weather  control  or  cloud  modification  shall,  before  engaging 
in  such  manufacture,  sale  or  offering  for  sale,  procure  a  license  from  the  Arizona 
water  commission.  The  license  shall  be  issued  upon  payment  of  a  license  fee  of 
ten  dollars  and  the  filing  of  an  application  which  shall  show  : 

1.  The  name  and  address  of  the  applicant. 

2.  The  full  description  of  the  type  and  design  of  the  equipment  and  sup- 
plies manufactured  and  sold  by  the  applicant. 

3.  The  operating  technique  of  the  equipment  or  supplies. 

B.  Within  sixty  days  after  issuance  of  an  equipment  license  and  semi-annually 
thereafter,  the  licensee  shall  file  with  the  commission  a  copy  of  all  advertising 
material  used  in  selling  or  offering  for  sale,  leasing  or  offering  for  lease,  licensing 
or  offering  for  license  the  equipment  and  supplies  manufactured  or  sold  by  it. 

C.  The  holder  of  a  license  shall  within  ten  days  after  each  sale  of  equipment  or 
supplies  report  to  the  commission,  in  writing,  the  exact  character  and  quantity 
of  equipment  or  supplies  sold,  the  date  of  the  sale  and  the  persons  to  whom  the 
sale  was  made. 

D.  Failure  to  file  a  copy  of  advertising  material  or  reports  required  in  this 
section  constitutes  grounds  for  immediate  revocation  of  the  equipment  license) 
A  s  a  mended  Laws  1071,  Ch.  49,  §  29. 

Effective  April  13,  1971. 

California 

Cal.  Water  Code  §§  400-415;  235 

Regulation  of  Rain-Making  and  Rain-Prevention 

Sec. 

400.  Legislative  finding. 

401.  Department  ;  person. 

402.  License  :  necessity. 

403.  License  ;  application  :  fee. 

404.  License  :  contents  of  application. 
40.").    License  ;  issuance  :  duration; 
400.    License  :  renewal ;  fee. 

407.     Notice  of  intention. 

405.  Notice  of  intention  ;  contents. 

409.  Notice  of  intention  :  publication. 

410.  Notice  of  intention  ;  proof  of  publication. 

411.  Record  of  operations. 

412.  Evaluation  statement. 

413.  Emergency  nucleation  project ;  fire  fighting. 
413.5  Proutrbt  emergency. 

414.  License  :  revocation  or  suspension  ;  procedure. 

415.  Violation  ;  offense. 


517 


Chapter  4  teas  added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  903,  §  1. 

§  400.  Legislative  finding 

The  public  interest,  health,  safety,  welfare,  and  necessity  require  that  scientific 
experimentation  in  the  field  of  artificial  nucleation,  and  that  scientific  efforts  to 
develop,  increase,  and  regulate  natural  precipitation  be  encouraged,  and  that 
means  be  provided  for  the  regulation  and  control  of  interference  by  artificial 
means  with  natural  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in  any  form 
contained  in  the  atmosphere,  within  the  State,  in  order  to  develop,  conserve,  and 
protect  the  natural  water  resources  of  the  State  and  to  safeguard  life  and 
property. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  903,  §  1.) 
§  J/01.  Department ;  person 
As  used  in  this  chapter  : 

(a)  "Department"  means  the  Department  of  Water  Resources. 

(b)  "Person"  means  any  person,  firm,  association,  organization,  partner- 
ship, company,  corporation,  private  or  public,  county,  city,  city  and  county, 

district,  or  other  public  agency. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  903,  §  1.  Amended  by  Stats.  1959,  c.  1269,  p.  3415, 
§2.) 

§  1/02.  License ;  necessity 

No  person,  without  first  securing  a  license  from  the  department,  shall  cause  or 
attempt  to  cause  condensation  or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water 
in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere,  or  shall  prevent  or  attempt  to  prevent 
by  artificial  means  the  natural  condensation  or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  mois- 
ture, or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere. 
(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  903,  §  1.) 
§  403.  License;  application;  fee 

Any  person  desiring  to  do  any  of  the  acts  specified  in  Section  102  may  file  with 
the  department  an  application  in  writing  for  a  license.  Each  application  shall  be 
accompanied  by  a  filing  fee  fixed  by  the  department  with  the  approval  of  the 
Department  of  General  Services  but  not  to  exceed  fifty  dollars  ($50)  and  shall  be 
on  a  form  to  be  supplied  for  such  purpose  by  the  department. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  904,  §  1.  Amended  by  Stats.  1965,  c.  371,  p.  1599, 
§292.) 

§  404>  License;  contents  of  application 
Every  application  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following  : 

(a)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  applicant. 

(b)  The  previous  education,  experience,  and  qualifications  of  the  appli- 
cant, or,  if  the  applicant  is  other  than  an  individual,  the  previous  education, 
experience,  and  qualifications  of  the  persons  who  will  be  in  control  of  and 
charged  with  the  operations  of  the  applicant. 

(c)  A  general  description  of  the  operation  which  the  applicant  intends  to 
conduct  and  the  method  and  type  of  equipment  that  the  applicant  proposes  to 
use. 

(d)  Such  other  pertinent  information  as  the  department  may  require. 
(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  904,  §  1. ) 

§  405.  License;  issuance;  duration 

Upon  the  filing  of  the  application  upon  a  form  supplied  by  the  department  and 
containing  the  informatio  prescribed  by  this  chapter  and  accompanied  by  the 
required  filing  fee  the  department  shall  issue  a  license  to  the  applicant  entitling 
the  applicant  to  conduct  the  operations  described  in  the  application  for  the  calen- 
dar year  for  which  the  license  is  issued,  unless  the  license  is  sooner  revoked  or 
suspended. 

(Added  by  Stats.1953,  c.  139,  p.  904,  §  1.) 

Derivation  :  Stats.  1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3868,  §  6. 
§  406.  License;  renewal;  fee 

A  license  may  be  renewed  annually  upon  application  to  the  department,  accom- 
panied by  a  renewal  fee  fixed  by  the  department  with  the  approval  of  the  Depart- 


518 


ment  of  General  Services  but  not  to  exceed  twenty-five  dollars  ($25),  on  or  before 
the  last'  day  of  January  of  the  calendar  year  for  which  the  license  is  renewed. 
(Added  by  Stats.1953,  c  139,  p.  904,  §  1.  Amended  by  Stats.1965,  c.  371,  p.  1399, 
§293.) 

Derivation  :  Stats.1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3868,  §  6. 
§  '{07.  Xotice  of  intention 

Prior  to  undertaking  any  operation  authorized  by  the  license  the  licensee  shall 
tile  with  the  department  and  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of  intention.  The 
licensee  shall  then  confine  his  activities  for  that  operation  substantially  within 
the  rime  and  area  limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention, 
i  Added  by  Stats.1953,  c.  139,  p.  904,  §  1.) 

Derivation  :  Stats.1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3868,  §  7. 
§  .'fOS.  Xotice  of  intention;  contents 

The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following  : 

(a)  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee. 

(b)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or 
persons  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted. 

(c)  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  opera- 
tion will  be  conducted. 

(d)  The  area  which  will  be  affected  by  the  operation  as  near  as  the  same 
may  be  determined  in  advance. 

(Added  by  Stats.1953,  c.  139,  p.  904,  §  1.) 

Derivation  :  Stats.1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3868,  §  8. 
§  409.  Xotice  of  intention;  publication 

The  licensee  shall  cause  the  notice  of  intention  to  be  published  pursuant  to 
Section  6063  of  the  Government  Code  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circula- 
tion and  published  within  any  county  wherein  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted 
and  in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or,  if  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted 
in  more  than  one  county  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one  county 
or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  con- 
ducted, then  such  notice  shall  be  published  in  like  manner  in  a  newspaper  having 
a  general  circulation  and  published  within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case  there  is 
no  newspaper  published  within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall  be  made 
in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  within  the  county. 
(Stats.1953,  c.  139,  p.  904,  §  1.  Amended  by  Stats.1955,  c.  482,  p.  953,  §  1;  Stats. 

1957,  c.  448,  p.  1302,  §  1.) 

§  410.  Xotice  of  intention;  proof  of  publication 

Proof  of  publication  shall  be  filed  by  the  licensee  with  the  department  within 
15  days  from  the  date  of  the  last  publication  of  the  notice.  Proof  of  publication 
shall  be  by  copy  of  the  notice  as  published  attached  to  and  made  a  part  of  the 
affidavit  of  the  publisher  or  foreman  of  the  newspaper  publishing  the  notice. 
(Added  by  Stats.1953.  c.  139,  p.  905,  §  1.) 

Derivation  :  Stats.1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3868,  §  10. 
S  ///.  Record  of  operations 

Every  licensee  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  conducted 
by  him  pursuant  to  his  license  showing  the  method  employed,  the  type  of  equip- 
ment used,  the  times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equipment,  the  name  and  post- 
office  address  of  each  person  participating  or  assisting  in  the  operation  other  than 
the  licensee,  and  such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  department, 
and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  department  immediately  upon  the  completion  of 
each  operation. 

(Added  by  Stats.1953,  c.  139,  p.  905,  §  1.) 

Derivation  :  Stats.1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3869,  §  11. 
§  'i12.  Evaluation  statement 

Each  licensee  shall  further  prepare  and  maintain  an  evaluation  statement  for 
each  operation  which  shall  include  a  report  as  to  estimated  precipitation,  defining 
the  gain  or  loss  occurring  from  nucleation  activities,  together  with  supporting 
data  therefor.  This  statement,  together  with  such  other  pertinent  information  as 


519 


the  department  may  require,  shall  be  sent  to  the  department  upon  request  by  the 
department. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  905,  §  1.) 

Derivation :  Stat.  1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3869,  §  11. 
§  413.  Emergency  nucleation  project;  fire  fighting 

Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  this  chapter  to  the  contrary,  the  department 
may  grant  a  licensee  permission  to  undertake  an  emergency  nucleation  project, 
without  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  Sections  407  to  410,  in- 
clusive, if  the  same  appeal's  to  the  department  to  be  necessary  or  desirable  in  aid 
of  extinguishment  of  fires. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  905,  §1.) 

Derivation  :  Stats,  1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3869,  §  12. 
§  'flS.o  Drought  emergency 

Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  this  chapter  to  the  contrary,  upon  request  of 
the  board  of  supervisors  of  a  county  or  of  the  governing  body  of  a  city  or  a  pub- 
lic district  of  the  State,  and  upon  the  submission  of  such  supporting  evidence 
as  the  department  may  require,  the  department  may  grant  a  licensee  permission 
to  undertake  a  nucleation  project  for  the  purpose  of  alleviating  a  drought  emer- 
gency, without  prior  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  Section  407 
requiring  publication  of  notice  of  intention,  if  such  project  appears  to  the  depart- 
ment to  be  necessary  or  desirable.  Nothing  contained  in  this  section  shall  be  con- 
strued as  to  relieve  the  licensee  in  such  case  from  compliance  with  the  provisions 
of  Sections  407  to  410,  inclusive,  requiring  publication  of  notice  of  intention  and 
tiling  of  proof  of  such  publication,  as  soon  after  the  granting  of  permission  by  the 
department  as  is  practicable. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1955,  c.  1399,  p.  2512,  §1.) 

§  'fl'/.  License;  revocation  or  suspension;  procedure 

Any  license  may  be  revoked  or  suspended  if  the  department  finds,  after  due 
notice  to  the  licensee  and  a  hearing  thereon,  that  the  licensee  has  failed  or  re- 
fused to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  chapter.  The  proceedings  herein 
referred  to  shall  be  conducted  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Admin- 
istrative Procedure  Act,  Chapter  5,  Part  1,  Division  3,  Title  2  of  the  Government 
Code  and  the  department  shall  have  all  the  powers  granted  therein. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  905,  §1.) 

Derivation :  Stats.  1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3869,  §  13. 
§        Violation;  offense 

Any  person  who  violates  any  provision  of  this  chapter  is  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1953,  c.  139,  p.  905,  §  1.) 

Derivation :  Stats.  1951,  c.  1677,  p.  3869,  §  14. 
§  285.  Weather  modification;  artificial  rainfall;  research  contracts 

The  department,  either  independently  or  in  co-operation  with  any  person  or  any 
county,  state,  federal,  or  other  agency,  to  the  extent  that  funds  are  allocated 
therefor,  may  conduct  a  program  of  study,  research,  experimentation,  and  evalu- 
ation in  the  field  of  weather  modification,  including  the  production  and  control 
of  rainfall  by  artificial  means,  and  it  may  contract  with  public  and  private  or- 
ganizations and  persons  for  research  relative  thereto. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1959,  c.  2115,  p.  4932,  §1.) 

Cal.  Gov't  Code  §  53063 

§  5806.  Rainfall  control 

Any  county,  city,  city  and  county,  district,  authority  or  other  public  corpora- 
tion or  agency  which  has  the  power  to  produce,  conserve,  control  or  supply  water 
for  beneficial  purposes  shall  have  the  power  to  engage  in  practices  designed  to 
produce,  induce,  increase  or  control  rainfall  or  other  precipitation  for  the  gen- 
eral benefit  of  the  territory  within  it.  (Formerly  §53062,  added  Stats.  1955,  c. 
1823.  p.  3365,  §  1.  Renumbered  §  53063.  and  amended  Stats.  1957,  c.  65,  p.  634,  §  4. ) 

Library  references:  Waters  and  Water  Courses  121;  C.J.S.  Waters  §  124; 
Waters  and  Water  Courses,  180,  183  (1,  2),  190,  198,  202;  C.J.S.  Waters 
§  228. 


520 


Cal.  Pub.  Res.  Code  §  5093.36 

§  5093.86   Management  and  preservation  of  wilderness  areas 

(a)  Except  as  otherwise  provided  in  this  chapter,  each  state  agency  with  juris- 
diction over  any  area  designated  as  a  wilderness  area  shall  be  responsible  for  pre- 
serving the  wilderness  character  of  the  wilderness  area  and  shall  so  administer 
such  area  for  such  other  purposes  for  which  it  may  have  been  established  as  also 
to  preserve  its  wilderness  character.  Except  as  otherwise  provided  in  this  chap- 
ter, wilderness  areas  shall  be  devoted  to  the  public  purposes  of  recreational, 
scenic,  scientific,  educational,  conservation,  and  historical  use. 

(b)  Except  as  specifically  provided  *  *  *  in  this  chapter,  and  subject  to  pri- 
vate rights  existing  as  of  January  1,  1975,  there  shall  be  no  commercial  enter- 
prise and  no  permanent  road  within  any  wilderness  area  and,  except  as  neces- 
sary in  emergencies  involving  the  health  and  safety  of  persons  within  the  wilder- 
ness area,  there  shall  be  no  temporary  road,  no  use  of  motor  vehicles,  motorized 
equipment,  or  motorboats,  no  landing  or  hovering  aircraft,  no  flying  of  aircraft 
lower  than  *  *  *  2,000  feet  above  the  ground,  no  other  form  of  mechanical  trans- 
port, and  no  structure  or  installation  within  any  wilderness  area. 

(c)  The  following  special  provisions  are  hereby  made  : 

(1)  Within  wilderness  areas,  such  measures  may  be  taken  as  may  be 
necessary  for  the  control  of  fire,  insects,  and  diseases,  subject  to  such  condi- 
tions as  the  state  agency  or  agencies  having  jurisdiction  over  such  wilder- 
ness areas  may  deem  desirable. 

(2)  Nothing  in  this  chapter  shall  prevent  any  activity  by  any  public 
agency  within  a  wilderness  area,  including  prospecting,  for  the  purpose  of 
gathering  information  about  mineral  or  other  resources,  which  the  state 
agency  or  agencies  having  jurisdiction  over  such  wilderness  area  have  de- 
termined will  be  carried  on  in  a  manner  compatible  with  the  preservation 
of  the  wilderness  environment. 

(3)  The  state  agency  or  agencies  having  jurisdiction  over  wilderness  areas 
may  authorize  the  collection  of  hydrometeorological  data  and  the  conduct  of 
weather  modification  activities,  including  both  atmospheric  and  surface  ac- 
tivities and  environmental  research,  which  are  within,  over,  or  may  affect 
wilderness  areas  and  for  such  purposes  may  permit  access,  installation,  and 
use  of  equipment  which  is  specifically  justified  and  unobtrusively  located. 
Maximum  practical  application  of  miniaturization,  telemetry,  and  camou- 
flage shall  be  employed  in  conducting  weather  modification  activities.  In 
granting  permission  for  the  conduct  of  data  collection  and  weather  modi- 
fication activities,  the  appropriate  state  agency  may  prescribe  such  operat- 
ing and  monitoring  conditions  as  it  deems  necessary  to  minimize  or  avoid 
long-term  and  intensive  local  impact  on  the  wilderness  character  of  the 
wilderness  areas  affected. 

(4)  Within  wilderness  areas,  the  grazing  of  livestock,  where  established 
prior  to  January  1.  1975.  may  be  permitted  to  be  continued  by  the  present 
lessee  or  permittee  subject  to  *  *  *  limitation  *  *  *  by  such  terms  and 
regulations  as  are  deemed  necessary  by  the  state  agency  or  agencies  having 
jurisdiction  over  such  wilderness  areas. 

(5)  The  provisions  of  this  chapter  shall  not  apply  to  the  aerial  stocking  of 
fish  or  to  the  conduct  of  aerial  surveys  of  wildlife  species. 

(Added  by  Stats.  1974,  c.  1196,  p.  ?58t  §2.  Amended  by  Stats.  1975,  c.  26, 
p.  ,  §  1 ;  Stats.  1976,  c.  592,  p.  ,  §  1.) 

Colorado 

Colo.  Rev.  Stat.  §36-20-101-36-20-126 

Weather  Modification 

ARTICLE  20 

\Y(  <itit<  r  MadificQtion 

Editor's  NOTE.— r-The  substantive  provisions  of  this  article,  formerly  article  1  of 
Chapter  151.  C.K.S.  1963.  were  repealed  and  reeuaeted  in  1972.  causing  some  addi- 
tion, reloctaion,  and  elimination  of  sections  as  well  as  subject  matter.  (Compare 
historical  record  prior  to  1972  of  article  1  of  chapter  151,  C.R.S.  1963,  as  amended 
through  L.  71.) 


521 


3G-20-101.  Short  title. 
30-20-102.  Legislative  declaration. 
36-20-103.  Declaration  of  rights. 
36-20-104.  Definitions. 
36-20-105.  Administration. 

36-20-106.  Advisory  committee — appointment — duties. 

36-20-107.  Duties  of  the  director. 

36-20-108.  Powers  of  the  director. 

36-20-109.  License  and  permit  required — exemptions. 

36— 20— 110.  Issuance  of  license. 

36-20-111.  License  fee — expiration. 

36-20-112.  Permit  required — when  issued. 

36-20-113.  Permit  fee. 

36-20-114.  Limits  of  permit. 

36-20-115.  Modification  of  permit. 

36-20-116.  Scope  of  activity. 

36-20-117.  Reports  of  licensee. 

36-20-118.    Operations  affecting  weather  in  other  states. 
36-20-119.    Suspension — revocation — refusal  to  renew. 
36-20-120.  Operation  under  permit. 
36-20-121.  Hearing  required. 

36-20-122.  Immunity  of  state  or  public  employees. 
36-20-123.  Legal  recourse — liability — damages. 
36-20-124.  License  or  permit  as  defense  in  actions. 
36-20-125.  Judicial  review. 
36-20-126.  Penalty. 

36-20-101.  Short  title. — This  article  shall  be  known  and  may  be  cited  as  the 
'•Weather  Modifietaion  Act  of  1972". 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  632,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-1. 

36-20-102.  Legislative  declaration. — The  general  assembly  declares  that  the 
state  of  Colorado  recognizes  that  economic  benefits  can  be  derived  for  the  people 
or  the  state  from  weather  modification.  Operations,  research,  experimentation, 
and  development  in  the  field  of  weather  modification  shall  therefore  be  encour- 
aged. In  order  to  minimize  possible  adverse  effects,  weather  modification  activi- 
ties shall  be  carried  on  with  proper  safeguards,  and  accurate  information  con- 
cerning such  activities  shall  be  made  available  for  purposes  of  regulation.  While 
recognizing  the  value  of  research  and  development  of  weather  modification  tech- 
niques by  governmental  agencies,  the  general  assembly  finds  and  declares  that 
the  actual  practice  of  weather  modification,  whether  at  public  or  private  expense, 
is  properly  a  commercial  activity  which  the  law  should  encourage  to  be  carried 
out,  whenever  practicable,  by  private  enterprise. 

Source :  R&RE,  L.  72.  p.  032,  §  1 :  C.R.S.  1963.  §  151-1-2. 

36-20-103.  Declarator,  of  right*. — The  general  assembly  declares  that  the  state 
of  Colorado  claims  the  right  to  all  moisture  suspended  in  the  atmosphere  which 
falls  or  is  artificially  induced  to  fall  within  its  borders.  Said  moisture  is  declared 
to  !>e  the  property  of  the  people  of  this  state,  dedicated  to  their  use  pursuant 
to  sections  5  and  6  of  article  XVI  of  the  Colorado  constitution  and  as  otherwise 
provided  by  law.  It  is  further  declared  that  the  state  of  Colorado  also  claims 
the  prior  right  to  increase  or  permit  the  increase  of  precipitation  by  artificial 
means  for  use  in  Colorado.  The  state  of  Colorado  also  claims  the  right  to  modify 
weather  as  it  affects  the  people  of  the  state  of  Colorado  and  to  permit  such 
modification  by  activitv  within  Colorado. 

Source :  R  &  RE,  L,  72,  p.  632,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-3. 

36-20-104.  Definitions. — As  used  in  this  article,  unless  the  context  otherwise 
requires : 

(1»  "Advisory  committee"  or  "committee"  means  the  advisory  committee  ap- 
pointed pursuant  to  this  article. 

(2)  "Director"  means  the  executive  director  of  the  department  of  natural 
resources,  as  created  by  article  33  of  title  24.  C.R.S.  1973. 

(3)  "License"  means  a  certification  issued  by  the  director  indicating  that  a 
specific  person  has  met  the  standards  for  certification  as  a  weather  modifier 
and  is  approved  to  direct  weather  modification  operations  in  the  state. 

(4>  "Operation"  means  the  performance  in  Colorado  of  any  activity  to  attempt 
to  modify  or  having  the  effect  of  modifying  natural  weather  conditions  other 
than  usual  and  customary  activities  not  conducted  primarily  for  weather  modi- 
fication and  having  only  a  minor  effect  on  natural  weather  conditions. 

I  a  i  "Permit"  means  a  certification  of  project  approval  to  conduct  a  specific 
weather  modification  operation  within  the  state  under  the  conditions  and 
within  the  limitations  required  and  established  under  the  provisions  of  this 
article. 

<6j  "Person"  means  an  individual,  partnership,  or  public  or  private  corpora- 
tion or  agency,  except  where  the  context  indicates  that  "person"  is  used  in  the 
sense  of  a  living  individual. 


522 


(7)  "Publication"  or  "publish"  means  a  minimum  of  at  least  two  consecutive 
weekly  legal  notices  in  at  least  one  newspaper  of  general  circulation  in  the 
county  or  counties,  or  portions  theerof,  included  within  the  proposed  operation. 
It  shall  not  be  necessary  that  notice  be  made  on  the  same  day  of  the  week  in 
each  of  the  two  weeks,  but  not  less  than  one  week  shall  intervene  between  the 
tirst  publication  and  the  last  publication,  and  notice  shall  be  complete  on  the 
date  of  the  last  publication.  If  there  is  no  such  newspaper,  notice  shall  be  by 
posting  in  at  least  three  public  places  within  the  county,  or  portions  thereof, 
included  within  a  proposed  operation.  Publication  of  notices  provided  for  in 
this  article  may  be  made,  at  the  discretion  of  the  director,  by  notices  broadcast 
over  any  or  all  standard  radio,  FM  radio,  television  stations,  and  cable  television. 
Such  broadcast  notices  shall  make  reference  to  locations  or  publications  wherein 
details  of  the  subject  matter  of  the  notices  are  located. 

(8)  "Research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration, 
experimentation,  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  techncial  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimentation 
and  demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing 
of  models,  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  processes  both  in  the  laboratory  and 
in  the  atmosphere. 

(9)  "Research  and  development  operation"  or  "research  and  development 
project"  means  an  operation  which  is  conducted  solely  to  advance  scientific  and 
technical  knowledge  in  weather  modification.  Research  and  development  opera- 
tions may  be  conducted  by  state  or  federal  agencies,  state  institutions  of  higher 
education,  and  bona  fide  nonprofit  research  corporations,  or  by  commercial 
operators  under  contracts  with  such  entities  solely  for  research  purposes. 

(10)  "Weather  modification"  means  any  program,  operation,  or  experiment 
intended  to  induce  changes  in  the  composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics  of  the 
atmosphere  by  artificial  means. 

36-20-^105.  Administration. —  (1)  The  executive  director  of  the  department  of 
natural  resources  is  hereby  charged  with  administration  of  this  article. 

(2)  The  director  shall  issue  all  licenses  and  permits  provided  for  in  this 
article.  He  is  hereby  empowered  to  issue  rules  and  regulations  he  finds  neces- 
sary to  facilitate  the  implementation  of  this  article,  and  he  is  authorized  to 
execute  and  administer  all  other  provisions  of  this  article  pursuant  to  the  powers 
and  limitations  contained  in  this  article. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  634,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963.  §  lol-l-5. 

36-20-106.  Advisory  committee — appointment — duties. —  (1)  (a)  The  governor 
shall  appoint  an  advisory  committee  to  assist  the  director  in  developing  licens- 
ing standards  and  report  forms,  in  conducting  studies,  in  establishing  minimum 
operation  requirements,  and  to  advise  the  director  on  such  other  technical  and 
general  matters  as  the  director  may  request.  The  director  may  designate  sub- 
committees from  the  advisory  committee  to  assist  him  in  carrying  out  the  pur- 
poses of  this  paragraph  (a). 

(b)  The  advisory  committee  shall  be  composed  of  ten  persons  chosen  by  the 
governor,  five  of  whom  shall  have  appropriate  scientific,  technical,  industrial, 
and  water  resources  background  and  who  may  reside  anywhere  within  the  state: 
and  live  of  whom  shall  be  farmers  or  ranchers  who  derive  the  major  portion  of 
their  income  from  agricultural  enterprises  located  within  Colorado:  One  farmer 
or  rancher  shall  reside  in  and  be  chosen  from  each  of  the  following  river  basins  in 
( Colorado : 

(I)  One  person  representing  the  Gunnison.  White,  Tampa,  and  Colorado 
river  basins  ; 

(Hi  One  person  representing  the  San  Juan  river  basin  : 

(III)  One  person  representing  the  Rio  Grande  river  basin  : 

(IV)  (  toe  person  representing  the  Arkansas  river  basin  :  and 

(V)  One  person  representing  the  Republican,  South  Platte,  and  North 
Platte  river  basins. 

(c)  At  the  tirst  meeting  of  the  committee  subsequent  to  the  passage  of  this 
section,  the  ten  appointed  members  of  the  committee  shall  draw  lots  to  deter- 
mine which  four  shall  hold  office  for  a  period  of  three  years,  which  three  shall 
li<»ld  office  for  a  period  of  two  years,  and  which  three  shall  hold  office  for  a  period 
of  one  year.  Thereafter,  appointed  members  to  the  committee  shall  hold  office 
for  a  period  of  three  years.  Any  six  members  of  the  committee  shall  constitute  a 
quorum. 

(2)  (.a)  When  any  person  shall  file  a  verified  complaint  alleging  damages'  as  a 
result  of  an  operation  or  that  an  operation  is  being  conducted  in  violation  of  the 


requirements  of  a  permit  or  in  violation  of  this  article,  the  director  shall  either 
convene  the  advisory  committee,  which  shall  investigate  the  complaint  and  shall 
conduct  a  hearing  or  he  may  appoint  a  hearing  officer  pursuant  to  section 
30-20-108  ( 3 )( h ) .  Thereafter  a  decision  shall  be  issued  in  accordance  with 
article  4  of  title  24.  C.R.S.  1973.  Such  decision  shall  not  include  any  determination 
as  to  the  amount  of  damages,  if  any. 

(b)  The  record  of  the  hearing,  including  all  evidence,  exhibits,  and  other 
papers  presented  or  considered,  together  with  all  findings  of  fact  and  conclu- 
sions of  law,  shall  be  available  to  any  part  in  interest  for  use  in  any  action 
for  judicial  review  or  a  trial  for  damages,  subject  to  applicable  rules  of  evidence. 

(3)  Members  of  the  advisory  committee  shall  not  be  paid  for  their  services 
but  they  may  be  reimbursed  for  any  actual  and  necessary  expenses  they  incur  in 
the  perf  ormance  of  their  duties. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  634,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-6. 

36-20-107.  Duties  of  the  director. —  (1)  The  director  shall  establish  rules 
and  regulations,  in  accordance  with  article  (4)  of  title  24,  C.R.S.  1973,  necessary 
to  effectuate  the  purposes  of  this  article  and  shall  consult  with  the  advisory  com- 
mittee with  respect  thereto. 

(2)  (a)  The  director  shall  establish  qualifications,  procedures,  and  condi- 
tions for  the  issuance  of  licenses  for  the  purpose  of  conducting  weather  modifi- 
cation activities  within  the  state.  Such  qualifications,  procedures,  and  conditions 
shall  be  developed  in  consultation  with  the  advisory  committee  appointed 
pursuant  to  section  36-20-106. 

(b)  The  qualifications  so  established  shall  insure  that  the  licensee  demonstrates 
knowledge,  skill,  and  experience  reasonably  necessary  to  accomplish  weather 
modification  without  actionable  injury  to  person  or  property,  but  the  licensee 
shall  be  limited  to  the  exercise  of  such  license  to  the  method  of  weather  modifi- 
cation within  his  area  of  expertise.  At  a  minimum  each  such  application  shall 
meet  requirements  at  least  as  stringent  as  one  or  more  of  the  following: 

(I)  Demonstrates  that  he  has  at  least  eight  years'  experience  at  the  pro- 
fessional level  in  weather  modification  field  research  or  operations,  at  least 
three  of  those  year  as  a  project  director  ;  or 

(II)  Has  obtained  a  baccalaureate  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics, 
or  the  physical  sciences  plus  three  years'  experience  in  weather  modification 

.  held  research  or  operations  ;  or 

(III)  Has  obtained  a  baccalaureate  degree  in  meteorology,  or  a  degree 
in  engineering  or  the  physical  sciences  which  includes,  or  is  an  addition  to, 
the  equivalent  of  at  least  twenty-five  semester  hours  of  meteorological 
course  work  and  two  years'  practical  experience  in  weather  modification 
operations  or  research. 

Source :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  635,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-7 ;  L.  73.  p.  1535,  §  2. 

36-20-108.  Powers  of  the  director. —  (1)  The  director  may  issue  permits 
applicable  to  specific  weather  modification  operations.  For  each  operation, 
said  permit  shall  describe  the  specific  geographic  area  authorized  to  be  affected 
and  shall  provide  a  specific  time  period  during  wrhich  the  operation  may  con- 
tinue, which  period  may  be  discontinuous  but  may  not  have  a  total  duration 
exceeding  one  calendar  year  from  the  day  of  its  issuance.  A  separate  permit 
shall  be  required  for  each  operation.  The  director  shall  issue  a  permit  only 
after  it  is  established  that  the  project  is  conceived  to  provide  economic  benefits 
or  that  it  will  advance  or  enhance  scientific  knowledge.  The  director  shall  issue 
only  one  active  permit  for  activities  in  any  geographic  area  if  two  or  more 
projects  therein  might  adversely  interfere  with  each  other.  The  director  shall 
ask  the  advisory  committee  to  review  each  request  for  a  permit  and  offer  him  its 
advice  on  issuance. 

(2)  The  director  shall,  by  regulation  or  order,  establish  standards  instruc- 
tions to  govern  the  carrying  out  of  research  and  development  or  commercial 
operations  in  weather  modification  that  he  considers  necessary  or  desirable 
to  minimize  danger  to  land,  health,  safety,  people,  property,  or  the 
environment. 

(3)  (a)  The  director  may  make  any  studies  or  investigations,  obtain  any 
information,  and  hold  any  hearings  he  considers  necessary  or  proper  to  assist 
him  in  exercising  his  power  or  administering  or  enforcing  this  article  or  any 
regulations  or  orders  issued  under  this  article. 

(b)  All  hearings  conducted  under  this  article  shall  be  conducted  pursuant 
to  the  provisions  of  this  article  and  article  4  of  title  24.  C.R.S.  1973,  and  the 


524 


director  may  by  his  own  action,  or  at  the  request  of  the  advisory  committee, 

appoint  a  hearing  officer  to  conduct  any  hearing  required  by  this  article : 
said  hearing  to  be  conducted  under  the  provisions  and  within  the  limitations 
of  article  4  of  title  24,  C.R.S.  1073.  and  this  article. 

(4)  (a)  The  director  may.  upon  approval  of  the  governor,  represent  the 
state  in  matters  pertaining  to  plans,  procedures,  or  negotiations  for  interstate 
compacts  relating  to  weather  modification,  but,  before  any  such  compacts 
may  be  implemented,  the  consent  of  the  general  assembly  must  be  obtained. 

(b)  The  director  may  represent  the  state,  and  assist  counties,  municipal- 
ities, and  public  agencies  in  contracting  with  commercial  operators  for  the 
performance  of  weather  modification  or  cloud  seeding  operations.  Counties, 
municipalities,  and  other  public  agencies  of  this  state  are  hereby  granted  the 
authority  to  contribute  to  and  participate  in  weather  modification. 

(5)  In  order  to  assist  in  expanding  the  theoretical  and  practical  knowledge 
of  weather  modification  the  director  may  participate  in  and  promote  continu- 
ous research  and  development  in  : 

(a)  The  theory  and  development  of  weather  modification,  including 
processes,  materials,  ecological  effects,  and  devices  related  to  such  matters; 

(b)  The  utilization  of  weather  modification  for  agricultural,  industrial, 
commercial,  municipal,  recreational,  and  other  purposes  ; 

(c)  The  protection  of  life  and  property  and  the  environment  during 
research  and  operational  activities. 

(6)  The  director  may  conduct  and  may  contract  for  research  and 
development  activities  relating  to  the  purposes  of  this  article. 

i  7 )  The  director,  subject  to  limits  of  the  department  of  natural  resources' 
appropriation,  may  hire  any  technical  or  scientific  experts  or  any  staff  deemed 
necessary  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  article. 

(8)  Subject  to  any  limitations  imposed  by  law,  the  department  of  natural 
resources,  acting  through  the  director,  may  accept  federal  grants,  private 
gifts,  and  donations  from  any  other  source.  Unless  the  use  of  the  money  is 
restricted,  or  subject  to  any  limitations  provided  by  law,  the  director  may : 

(a )  Spend  it  for  the  administration  of  this  article  : 

(b)  By  grant,  contract,  or  cooperative  arrangement,  use  the  money  to 
encourage  research  and  development  by  a  public  or  private  agency  ;  or 

(c)  Use  the  money  to  contract  for  weather  modification  operations. 

(0)  The  director,  in  cooperation  with  the  advisory  committee,  shall  pre- 
scribe those  measurements  reasonably  necessary  to  be  made  prior  to  and 
during  all  operations  to  determine  the  probable  effects  of  an  operation. 

Source  :  R  &  RE  L.  72,  p.  636.  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-8. 

36-20-100.  License  and  permit  required — exemptions. —  (1)  Xo  person  may 
engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control  without  a  weather 
modification  license  and  a  weather  modification  permit  issued  by  the  director: 
nor  may  any  person  engage  in  any  activities  in  violation  of  any  term  or  condi- 
tion of  the  license  or  the  permit. 

( 2 )  The  director,  to  the  extent  he  considers  exemptions  practical,  may 
provide  by  regulation  for  exempting  the  following  activities  from  the  fee  re- 
quirements of  this  article  : 

(a)  Research,  development,  and  experiments  conducted  by  state  and  fed- 
eral agencies,  state  institutions  of  higher  education,  and  bona  fide  nonprofit 
research  organizations ; 

(1))  Laboratory  research  and  experiments:  and 

(c)  Activities  of  an  emergency  nature  for  protection  against  fire,  frostj 
hail,  sleet.  smog,  fog,  or  drought. 
Sen  rce  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72.  p.  637,  §  1  :  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-10. 

36-20-110.  Issuance  r,f  license.— CI  )  The  director,  in  accordance  with  appli- 
cable regulations,  shall  issue  a  weather  modification  license  to  each  applicant 
who  : 

(a)  Pays  the  license  fee.  if  applicable  :  and 

(b)  Meets  the  qualifications  for  licensure  established  by  the  director 
pursuant  to  section  3C>-20--107  (2). 

Source:  R  &  UK.  L.  7L>.  p.  837,  §1:  C.R.S.  1063.  §151-1-10. 

36-^20-111.     r.icensc  frr    expiration.— \  license  shall  be  issued  under  this' 
article  only  upon  the  payment  to  the  state  of  Colorado  the  sum  of  one  hun- 
dred dollars  for  such  licence.  Each  such  license  shall  expire  at  the  end  of 
the  calendar  year  in  which  it  is  Issued. 

Source:  R  &  RE.  L.  72.  p.  638,  S  1  ;  C.R.S.  1063.  §  151-1-li. 


525 


36-20-112.  Permit  required — when  issued. —  (1)  The  director,  in  accordance 
with  his  regulations,  shall  issue  a  weather  modification  permit  to  each  appli- 
cant who : 

(a)  Holds,  or  if  the  applicant  is  a  corporation,  the  corporation  demon- 
strates that  the  person  in  control  of  the  project  holds,  a  valid  weather 
modification  license. 

(b)  Pays  the  permit  fee,  if  applicable. 

(c)  Furnishes  proof  of  financial  responsibility  adequate  to  meet  obli- 
gations reasonably  likely  to  be  attached  to  or  result  from  the  proposed 
weather  modification  operation.  Such  proof  of  financial  responsibility  may, 
but  at  the  discretion  of  the  director  shall  not  be  required  to,  be  shown  by 
presentation  of  proof  of  a  prepaid  insurance  policy  with  an  insurance 
company  licensed  to  do  business  in  Colorado,  which  insurance  policy  shall 
insure  liabilities  in  an  amount  set  by  the  director  and  provide  a  cancellation 
clause  with  a  thirty-day  notice  to  the  director,  or  by  filing  with  the  director 
an  individual,  schedule,  blanket,  or  other  corporate  surety  bond  in  an 
amount  approved  by  the  director. 

(d)  Submits  a  complete  operational  plan  for  each  proposed  project 
prepared  by  the  licensed  operator  in  control  which  includes  a  specific 
statement  of  objectives,  a  map  of  the  proposed  operating  area  which 
specifies  the  primary  target  area  and  shows  the  area  reasonably  expected 
to  be  affected,  the  name  and  address  of  the  licensee,  the  nature  and  object 
of  the  intended  operation,  the  person  or  organization  on  whose  behalf  it 
is  to  be  conducted,  a  statement  showing  any  expected  effect  upon  the 
environment  and  methods  of  determining  and  evaluating  the  same,  and 
such  other  detailed  information  as  may  be  required  to  describe  the  opera- 
tion and  its  proposed  method  of  evaluation.  This  operational  plan  shall  be 
placed  on  file  with  the  director  and  with  any  other  agent  as  he  may 
required. 

(e)  Publishes  a  notice  of  intent  to  modify  weather  in  the  counties  to  be 
affected  by  the  weather  modification  program  before  the  licensee  secures  a 
permit  and  before  beginning  operations.  The  published  notice  shall  designate 
the  primary  target  area  and  indicate  the  general  area  which  might  be 
affected.  It  shall  also  indicate  the  expected  duration  and  intended  effect  and 
state  that  complete  details  are  available  on  request  from  the  licensee  or  the 
director  or  from  the  other  agent  specified  by  the  director.  The  publication 
shall  also  specify  a  time  and  place,  not  more  than  one  week  following  the 
completion  of  publication,  for  a  hearing  on  the  proposed  project.  Proof  of 
publication  shall  be  furnished  to  the  director  by  the  licensee. 

(f )  Receives  approval  under  the  criteria  set  forth  in  subsection  (3)  of  this 
section. 

(2)  Before  a  permit  may  be  issued,  the  director  or  his  authorized  agents 
shall  hold  a  public  hearing  on  the  proposed  project.  Said  hearing  shall  be 
held  in  a  place  within  a  reasonable  proximity  of  the  area  expected  to  be 
affected  by  the  proposed  operation. 

(3)  No  permit  may  be  issued  unless  the  director  determines,  based  on  the 
information  provided  in  the  operational  plan  and  on  the  testimony  provided 
at  the  public  hearing : 

(a)  That,  if  it  is  a  commercial  project,  the  proposed  weather  modification 
operation  is  conceived  to  provide,  and  offers  promise  of  providing,  an  eco- 
nomic benefit  to  the  area  in  which  the  operation  will  be  conducted : 

(b)  That  the  project  is  reasonably  expected  to  benefit  the  people  in  said 
area  or  benefit  the  people  of  the  state  of  Colorado : 

(c)  That  the  project  is,  if  it  is  a  commercial  project,  scientifically  and 
technically  feasible ; 

(d)  That  the  project  is,  if  it  is  a  scientific  or  research  project,  designed 
for  and  offers  promise  of  expanding  the  knowledge  and  the  technology  of 
weather  modification : 

(e)  That  the  project  does  not  involve  a  high  degree  of  risk  of  substantial 
harm  to  land,  people,  health,  safety,  property,  or  the  environment : 

(f)  That  the  project  is  designed  to  include  adequate  safeguards  to  pre- 
vent substantial  damage  to  land,  water  rights,  people,  health,  safety,  or  to 
the  environment ; 

(g)  That  the  project  will  not  adversely  affect  another  project:  and 
34-857 — 79  36 


526 


(h)  That  the  project  is  designed  to  minimize  risk  and  maximize  scientific 
gains  or  economic  benefits  to  the  residents  of  the  area  or  the  state. 
Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  638,  §  1 :  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-12. 
36-20-113.    Permit  fee. — The  fee  for  each  permit  or  the  renewal  thereof 
under  section  36-20-114  shall  be  at  a  minimum  of  one  hundred  dollars.  If  the 
operation  is  a  commercial  project  an  additional  amount  equal  to  two  percent 
of  the  value  of  the  contract  for  such  commercial  project  shall  be  required 
and  paid  before  a  permit  may  be  issued.  Said  fees  are  intended  to  provide 
at  least  a  portion  of  the  moneys  necessary  to  administer  this  article. 
Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  639,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963.  §  151-1-13. 

36-20-114.  Limits  of  permit. —  (1)  A  separate  permit  is  required  annually 
for  each  operation.  If  an  operation  is  to  be  conducted  under  contract,  a 
permit  is  required  for  each  separate  contract.  Subject  to  the  provisions  of 
subsection  (2)  of  this  section,  a  permit  may  be  granted  for  more  than  one 
year's  duration. 

(2)  The  director  may  conditionally  approve  a  project  for  a  continuous  time 
period  in  excess  of  one  year's  duration.  Permits  for  such  operations  must 
be  renewed  annually.  In  approving  the  renewal  of  a  permit  for  a  continuous 
program,  the  director  may  waive  the  procedures  for  initial  issuance  of  a 
permit  in  section  36-20-112  and,  upon  his  review  and  approval  of  the  project's 
operational  record,  or,  if  at  his  request,  the  advisory  committee  reviews  and 
subsequently  approves  the  project's  operational  record,  he  may  issue  a  re- 
newed permit  for  the  operation  to  continue.  In  such  instances,  the  fees,  based 
upon  the  value  of  the  contract  pursuant  to  section  26-20-113  may  be  prorated 
and  paid  on  an  annual  basis. 

(3)  A  project  permit  may  be  granted  by  the  director  without  prior  publi- 
cation of  notice  by  the  licensee  in  case  of  fire,  frost,  hail,  sleet,  smog,  fog, 
drought,  or  other  emergency.  In  such  cases,  publication  of  notice  shall  be 
performed  as  soon  as  possible  and  shall  not  be  subject  to  the  time  limits 
specified  in  this  article  4  of  title  24,  C.R.S.  1973. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  639,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-14. 

36-20-115.  Modification  of  permit. —  (1)  The  director  may  revise  the  terms 
and  conditions  of  a  permit  if  : 

(a)  The  licensee  is  first  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a 
hearing  on  the  need  for  a  revision  ;  and 

(b)  It  appears  to  the  director  that  a  revision  is  necessary  to  protect  the 
health  or  property  of  any  person  or  to  protect  the  environment. 

(2)  If  it  appears  to  the  director  that  an  emergency  situation  exists  or  is 
impending  which  could  endanger  life,  property,  or  the  environment,  he  may, 
without  prior  notice  or  a  hearing,  immediately  modify  the  conditions  of  a  permit, 
or  order  temporary  suspension  of  the  permit  on  his  own  order.  The  issuance  of 
such  order  shall  include  notice  of  a  hearing  to  be  held  within  ten  days  thereafter 
on  the  question  of  permanently  modifying  conditions  or  continuing  the  suspension 
of  the  permit.  Failure  to  comply  with  an  order  temporarily  suspending  an 
operation  or  modifying  the  conditions  of  a  permit  shall  be  grounds  for  imme- 
diate revocation  of  the  permit  and  the  operator's  license. 

(3)  It  shall  be  the  responsibility  of  the  licensee  conducting  any  operation 
to  notify  the  director  of  any  emergency  which  can  reasonably  be  foreseen  or 
of  any  existing  emergency  situations  in  subsection  (2)  of  this  section  which 
might  in  any  way  be  caused  or  affected  by  the  weather  modification  operation. 
Failure  by  the  licensee  to  so  notify  the  director  of  any  such  existing  emergency, 
or  any  impending  emergency  which  should  have  been  foreseen,  may  be  grounds, 
at  the  discretion  of  the  director,  for  revocation  of  the  license  and  revocation  of 
the  permit  for  operation. 

Source :  R  &  RE.  L.  72,  p.  640,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-15. 

36-20-116.  Scope  of  activity. — Once  a  permit  is  issued,  the  licensee  shall  con- 
fine his  activities  within  the  limits  of  time  and  area  specified  in  the  permit, 
except  to  the  extent  that  the  limits  are  modified  by  the  director.  He  shall  also 
comply  with  any  terms  and  conditions  of  the  permit  as  originally  issued  or  as 
subsequently  modified  by  the  direetor. 

Source :  R  &  RE.  L.  72,  p.  640,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963.  §  151-1-16. 

36-20-117.  Reports  of  licensee. —  (1)  In  order  to  aid  in  research  and  develop- 
ment in  weather  modification  and  to  aid  in  the  protection  of  life  and  property 
or  the  environment,  any  person  conducting  any  weather  modification  operation 
in  Colorado  or  elsew  here  where  by  undertaking  operations  within  Colorado  shall 


527 


file  such  reports  at  such  time  and  in  the  manner  and  form  as  shall  be  required 
by  regulation  of  the  director. 

(2)  Report  forms  may  be  developed  by  the  director  on  the  advice  of  the 
advisory  committee  and  shall  include  basic  records  showing:  The  method 
employed,  the  type  of  equipment  used,  the  kind  and  amount  of  each  material  used, 
the  times  and  places  the  equipment  is  operated,  the  name  and  address  of  each 
individual,  other  than  the  licensee,  who  participates  or  assists  in  the  operation, 
any  environmental  effects  realized  or  suspected  to  have  occurred,  and  any  other 
necessary  data  he  may  require. 

(3)  The  director  shall  require  written  biweekly  reports  summarizing  the  proj- 
ect's activities  and  intended  results  while  the  project  is  actually  in  operation, 
and  he  shall  require  a  written  final  operational  report  and  a  written  final  report 
evaluating  the  project,  or  an  annual  operational  report  and  an  annual  project 
evaluation,  as  the  case  may  be.  A  final  operational  report  along  with  a  prelimi- 
nary scientific  evaluation  of  the  project  shall  be  filed  no  later  than  thirty  days 
after  the  completion  of  the  project.  A  final  complete  scientific  evaluation  of  the 
project  shall  be  filed  no  later  than  one  hundred  eighty  days  after  the  completion 
of  the  project.  An  annual  summary  report  shall  be  filed  sixty  days  prior  to  the 
renewal  of  a  permit  under  the  provisions  of  section  36-20-114(2).  All  such 
reports  are  declared  to  be  public  records  subject  to  the  provisions  and  limitations 
of  part  2  of  article  72  of  title  24,  C.R.S.  1973. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  640,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963.  §  151-1-17 ;  L.  73,  p.  1536.  §  3. 

36-20-118.  Operations  affecting  weather  in  other  states. — Weather  control 
operations  may  not  be  carried  on  in  Colorado  for  the  purpose  of  affecting  weather 
in  any  other  state  if  that  state  prohibits  such  operations  to  be  carried  on  in 
that  state  for  the  benefit  of  Colorado  or  its  inhabitants. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  641,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-18. 

36-20-119.  Suspension — revocation — refusal  to  renew. —  (1)  The  director  may 
suspend  or  revoke  a  license  or  permit  if  it  appears  that  the  licensee  no  longer  has 
the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  an  original  license  or  permit 
or  has  violated  any  provision  of  this  article. 

(2)  The  director  may  refuse  to  renew  the  license  of,  or  to  issue  another 
permit  to,  any  applicant  who  has  failed  to  comply  with  any  provision  of  this 
article. 

•Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  641 ;  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-19. 

36-20-120.  Operation  under  permit.  Operations  under  permit  may  only  be 
carried  forward  by  or  under  the  immediate  direction  and  supervision  of  a 
licensee. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  641 ;  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-20. 

36-20-21.  Hearing  required. —  (1)  Except  as  provided  in  section  36-20-115,  the 
director  may  not  suspend  or  revoke  a  license  or  permit  without  first  giving  the 
licensee  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  to  be  heard  with  respect  to  the 
grounds  for  his  proposed  action. 

(2)  Said  hearing  shall  be  conducted  by  the  advisory  committee  in  the  manner 
provided  in  section  36-20-106(2)  or  in  the  same  manner  bv  a  hearing  officer. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  641 ;  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963.  §  151-1-21. 

36-20-22.  Immunity  of  state  or  public  employees. — Officers  or  employees  of 
the  state  or  any  agency  thereof,  or  officers  or  employees  of  any  county  or 
municipality  or  other  public  agency  of  the  state,  are  immune  from  liability 
resulting  from  any  weather  modification  operations  approved  or  conducted  by 
them  under  the  provisions  and  limitations  of  this  article. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72.  p.  641 :  §  1 :  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-22. 

36-20-123.  Legal  recourse — liability — damages. —  (1)  The  mere  dissemination 
of  materials  and  substances  into  the  atmosphere  pursuant  to  an  authorized 
project  shall  not  give  rise  to  the  contention  or  concept  that  such  use  of  the 
atmosphere  constitutes  trespass  or  involves  an  actionable  or  enjoinable  public 
or  private  nuisance. 

(2)  (a)  Failure  to  obtain  a  license  or  permit  before  conducting  an  opera- 
tion, or  any  actions  which  knowingly  constitute  a  violation  of  the  conditions 
of  a  permit,  shall  constitute  negligence  per  se. 

(b)  The  director  may  order  any  person  who  is  found  to  be  conducting  a 
weather  modification  operation  without  a  license  and  permit  to  cease  and 
desist  from  said  operation.  Failure  to  obey  said  order  shall  constitute  a  mis- 
demeanor and  is  punishable  as  provided  in  section  36-20-126. 

Source:  R  &  RE,  L  72,  p.  641,  §  1;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-23. 


528 


36-20-124.  License  or  permit  as  defense  in  actions. — The  fact  that  a  person 
holds  a  license  or  was  issued  a  permit  under  this  article,  or  that  he  has  com- 
plied with  the  requirements  established  by  the  director  pursuant  to  this  article, 
is  not  admissible  as  a  defense  in  actions  for  damages  or  injunctive  relief 
brought  against  him. 

Source  :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  642,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-24. 

36-20-125.  Judicial  review. — Judicial  review  of  any  action  of  the  director 
or  findings  of  the  advisory  committee  may  be  had  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  section  24-^-106,  C.R.S.  1973. 

Source :  R  &  RE,  L.  72,  p.  642,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963,  §  151-1-25. 

36-20-126.  Penalty. — Any  person  conducting  a  weather  modification  opera- 
tion without  first  having  procured  a  required  license  and  permit,  or  who 
makes  a  false  statement  in  the  application  for  a  license  or  permit,  or  who 
fails  to  file  any  report  as  required  by  this  article,  or  who  conducts  any  weather 
modification  operation  after  revocation  of  a  license  or  denial,  revocation, 
modification,  or  temporary  suspension  of  a  permit  for  operation,  or  who  violates 
any  other  provisions  of  this  article  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and,  upon 
conviction  thereof,  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  more  than  five  thousand 
dollars,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than  six  months, 
or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment.  Each  such  violation  shall  be  a  separate 
offense. 

Source  :  R  &  RL,  L.  72,  p.  642,  §  1 ;  C.R.S.  1963.  §  351-1-26. 

Connecticut 
Conn.  Gen.  Stat.  Ann.  §§  24-5-24-8 

Weather  Control  Board 

Sec. 

24-5.  Weather  Control  board. 
24-6.  Duties. 

24-7.  Advisory  committees,  standards,  representation  of  state  in  interstate  matters. 
24-8.  Receipt  of  funds. 

§  2-'i-5.  Weather  control  board 

There  shall  be  a  weather  control  board,  consisting  of  the  commissioner  of 
agriculture,  the  commissioner  of  environmental  protection  or  his  designated 
representative,  the  dean  of  the  college  of  agriculture  of  The  University  of 
Connecticut,  the  director  of  the  Connecticut  Agricultural  Experiment  Station 
and  a  meteorologist,  whose  education  and  experience  qualify  him  for  profes- 
sional membership  in  the  American  Meteorological  Society  and  who  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  governor  for  a  term  of  six  years.  The  members  of  the  board 
shall  serve  without  compensation  but  shall  be  reimbursed  for  then  necessary 
expenses.  The  commissioner  of  agriculture  shall  be  chairman  of  the  board  and 
shall  furnish  such  supplies,  materials  and  clerical  assistance  as  the  duties  of 
the  board  may  require.  The  board  shall  meet  on  call  of  the  chairman  at  the 
offices  of  the  department  of  agriculture. 

(1959,  P.A.  668,  §1;  1961,  P.A.  16;  1971,  P. A.  872,  §206,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1971.) 
§  24-6.  Duties 

The  board  may  conduct,  and  promote  the  conduct  of,  research  and  develop- 
ment  activities  relating  to  : 

(1)  The  theory  and  development  of  methods  of  weather  modification 
and  control,  including  processes,  materials  and  devices  related  thereto ; 

(2)  the  utilization  of  weather  modification  and  control  for  agricultural, 
industrial,  commercial  and  other  purposes,  and 

(3)  the  protection  of  life  and  property  during  research  and  operational 
activities. 

(1959,  P.A.  668,  §2.) 

§  2-{-7.  Advisory  committees,  standards,  representation  of  state  in  interstate 
matters 

In  the  performance  of  its  functions  the  board  may: 

(1)  Establish  advisory  committees  to  advise  with  and  make  recommenda- 
tions to  the  board  concerning  legislation,  policies,  administration,  research 
and  other  matters ; 


529 


(2)  establish  standards  and  instructions  to  govern  research  in  weather 
modification  and  control,  and 

(3)  represent  the  state  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  plans,  procedures 
or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  relating  to  weather  modification 
and  control. 

(1959,  P. A.  668.  §3.) 

§  24-8.  Receipt  of  funds 

The  board  may.  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  imposed  by  law,  receive 
and  accept  on  behalf  of  the  state  any  funds  which  may  be  offered  or  which 
may  become  available  from  federal  grants  or  appropriations,  private  gifts, 
donations  or  bequests  or  any  other  source  and  may  expend  such  funds,  unless 
their  use  is  restricted  or  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  provided  by  law, 
for  the  administration  of  this  chapter  and  for  the  encouragement  of  research 
and  development  by  a  state,  public  or  private  agency  by  direct  grant,  by  contract 
or  by  cooperative  means. 
(959,  P. A.  668,  §4.) 

Florida 

Fla.  Stat.  Ann.  §§403.281-403.411 

403.281  Definitions ;  weather  modification  law 

As  used  in  this  chapter  relating  to  weather  modification  : 

(1)  "Department''  is  the  Deartment  of  [Environmental  Regulation]  \ 

(2)  "Person"  includes  any  public  or  private  corporation. 

403.291  Purpose  of  weather  modification  law 

The  purpose  of  this  law  is  to  promote  the  public  safety  and  welfare  by 
providing  for  the  licensing,  regulation  and  control  of  interference  by  artificial 
means  with  tbe  natural  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water 
in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere. 

403.301  Artificial  weather  modification  operation ;  license  required 

Xo  person  without  securing  a  license  from  the  department,  shall  cause  or 
attempt  to  cause  by  artificial  means  condensation  or  precipitation  of  rain, 
snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere,  or 
shall  prevent  or  attempt  to  prevent  by  artificial  means  the  natural  condensa- 
tion or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water  in  any  form  con- 
tained in  the  atmosphere. 

403.311  Application  for  licensing;  fee 

(1)  Any  person  desiring  to  do  or  perform  any  of  the  acts  specified  in  §  403.301 
may  file  with  the  department  an  application  for  a  license  on  a  form  to  be 
supplied  by  the  department  for  such  purpose  setting  forth  all  of  the  following: 

(a)  The  name  and  post  office  address  of  the  applicant. 

(b)  The  education,  experience  and  qualifications  of  the  applicant,  or 
if  the  applicant  is  not  an  individual,  the  education,  experience  and  qualifica- 
tions of  the  persons  who  will  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  the  operation 
of  the  applicant. 

(c)  The  name  and  post  office  address  of  the  person  on  whose  behalf  the 
weather  modification  operation  is  to  be  conducted  if  other  than  the 
applicant. 

(d)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  weather  modification  operation  which 
the  applicant  proposes  to  conduct,  including  a  general  description  of 
such  operation. 

(e)  The  method  and  type  of  equipment  and  the  type  and  composition 
of  materials  that  the  applicant  proposes  to  use. 

(f)  Such  other  pertinent  information  as  the  department  may  require. 

(2)  Each  application  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  filing  fee  in  the  sum  of 
one  hundred  dollars  and  proof  of  financial  responsibility  as  required  by 
§  403.321. 

403.321  Proof  of  financial  responsibility 

(1)  Xo  license  shall  be  issued  to  any  person  until  he  has  filed  with  the 
department  proof  of  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for  liability  on  account  of 


1  Bracketed  words  substituted  by  the  division  of  statutory  revision  for  tbe  words  "Pollu- 
tion Control."  See  Laws  1975.  e.  75-22.  §  8. 
Republished  to  conform  to  Fla.  St.  1975. 


530 


accidents  arising  out  of  the  weather  modification  operations  to  be  conducted 
by  him  in  the  amount  of  ten  thousand  dollars  because  of  bodily  injury  to  or 
death  of  one  person  resulting  from  any  one  incident,  and  subject  to  said  limit 
for  one  person,  in  the  amount  of  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  because  of 
bodily  injury  to  or  death  of  two  or  more  persons  resulting  from  any  one  inci- 
dent, and  in  the  amount  of  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  because  of  injury  to 
or  destruction  of  property  of  others  resulting  from  any  one  incident. 

(2)  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  may  be  given  by  filing  with  the  depart- 
ment a  certificate  of  insurance  or  a  bond  in  the  required  amount. 

403.331  Issuance  of  license;  suspension  or  revocation;  renewal 

( 1 )  The  department  shall  issue  a  license  to  each  applicant  who  : 

(a)  By  education,  skill  and  experience  appears  to  be  qualified  to  under- 
take the  weather  modification  operation  proposed  in  his  application. 

(b)  File  proof  of  his  financial  responsibility  as  required  by  §403.321. 

(c)  Pays  filing  fee  required  in  §  403.311. 

(2)  Each  such  license  shall  entitle  the  licensee  to  conduct  the  operation 
described  in  the  application  for  the  calendar  year  for  which  the  license  is 
issued  unless  the  license  is  sooner  revoked  or  suspended.  The  conducting  of  any 
weather  modification  operation  or  the  use  of  any  equipment  or  materials  other 
than  those  described  in  the  application  shall  be  cause  for  revocation  or  sus- 
pension of  the  license. 

(3)  The  license  may  be  renewed  annually  by  payment  of  a  filing  fee  in  the 
sum  of  fifty  dollars. 

403.341  Filing  and  publication  of  notice  of  intention  to  operate;  limitation  on 
area  and  time 

Prior  to  undertaking  any  operation  authorized  by  the  license,  the  licensee  shall 
file  with  the  department  and  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of  intention.  The 
licensee  shall  then  confine  his  activities  substantially  within  the  time  and  area 
limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention. 

403.351  Contents  of  notice  of  intention 
The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following : 

( 1 )  The  name  and  post  office  address  of  the  licensee. 

(2)  The  name  and  post  office  of  the  persons  on  whose  behalf  the  weather 
modification  operation  is  to  be  conducted  if  other  than  the  licensee. 

(3)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  weather  modification  operation  which 
licensee  proposes  to  conduct,  including  a  general  description  of  such  operation. 

(4)  The  method  and  type  of  equipment  and  the  type  and  composition  of  the 
materials  the  licensee  proposes  to  use. 

(5)  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  operation 
will  be  conducted. 

,(G)  The  area  which  will  be  affected  by  the  operation  as  nearly  as  the  same 
may  be  determined  in  advance. 

403.361  Publication  of  notice  of  intention 

The  licensee  shall  cause  the  notice  of  intention  to  be  published  at  least  once 
a  week  for  two  consecutive  weeks  in  a  newspaper  having  general  circulation 
and  published  within  any  county  wherein  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and 
in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or  if  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in 
more  than  one  county  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one  county 
or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  con- 
ducted, then  such  notice  shall  be  published  in  like  manner  in  a  newspaper  hav- 
ing a  general  circulation  and  published  within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case 
there  is  no  newspaper  published  within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall 
be  made  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  within  the  county. 

.) 03.. ill  Proof  of  publ ica t i on 

Proof  of  publication  shall  be  filed  by  the  licensee  with  the  department 
fifteen  days  from  the  date  of  the  last  publication  of  notice.  Proof  of  publication 
shall  be  by  copy  of  the  notice  as  published,  attached  to  and  made  a  part  of  the 
affidavit  of  the  publisher  or  foreman  of  the  newspaper  publishing  the  notice. 

403.38 1  I \' <■<■(,)■ d  and  reports  of  operations 

1  1  )  Each  licensee  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  conducted 
by  him  pursuant  to  his  license  showing  the  method  employed,  the  type  and 
composition  of  materials  used,  the  times  and  places  of  operation,  the  name  and 


531 


post  office  address  of  each  person  participating  or  assisting-  in  the  operation 
other  than  licensee  and  such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the 
department  and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  department  at  such  times  as  it 
may  require. 

(2)  The  records  of  the  department  and  the  reports  of  all  licensees  shall 
be  available  for  public  examination. 

403.391  Emergency  licenses 

Notwithstanding  any  provisions  of  this  act  to  the  contrary,  the  department 
may  grant  a  license  permitting  a  weather  modification  operation  without 
compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  §§  403.351-403.371,  and  without 
publication  of  notice  of  intention  as  required  by  §  403.341  if  the  operation 
appears  to  the  department  to  be  necessary  or  desirable  in  aid  of  the  extinguish- 
ment of  fire,  dispersal  of  fog  or  other  emergency. 

403.401  Suspension  or  revocation  of  license;  appeal 

(1)  Any  license  may  be  revoked  or  suspended  if  the  department  finds,  after 
due  notice  to  the  licensee  and  a  hearing  therein,  that  the  licensee  has  failed 
or  refused  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

(2)  Any  licensee  may  apply  to  the  circuit  court  for  the  county  of  Leon  to 
review  any  order  of  the  department  within  the  time  provided  by  the  Florida 
appellate  rules.  The  review  shall  be  by  certiorari  in  the  manner  prescribed  by 
the  Florida  appellate  rules. 

(3)  Either  the  department  or  the  licensee  may  appeal  from  the  order  or 
decree  of  the  circuit  court  to  the  appropriate  district  court  of  appeal  in  the 
same  manner  appeals  may  be  taken  in  suits  in  equity. 

403.411  Penalty 

Any  person  conducting  a  weather  modification  operation  without  first  having 
produced  a  license,  or  who  shall  make  a  false  statement  in  his  application  for 
license,  or  who  shall  fail  to  file  any  report  or  reports  as  required  by  this  act, 
or  who  shall  conduct  any  weather  modification  operation  after  revocation  or 
suspension  of  his  license,  or  who  shall  violate  any  other  provision  of  this  act, 
shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  of  the  second  degree,  punishable  as  provided 
in  §  775.082  or  §  775.083 ;  and  if  a  corporation,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor of  the  second  degree,  punishable  as  provided  in  §  775.083.  Each  such 
violation  shall  be  a  separate  offense. 

Hawaii 

Haw.  Rev.  Stat.  §  174-5(8) 

§  114-5  Powers 

In  addition  to  all  the  powers  granted  to  the  board  of  land  and  natural  resources 
in  chapter  171  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  all  of  its  functions  and  duties, 
the  board  shall  have  the  following  powers  for  the  purposes  of  this  chapter : 

(8)  To  investigate  and  make  surveys  of  water  resources,  including  the 
possibility  and  feasibility  of  inducing  rain  by  artificial  or  other  means ; 

Idaho 

Idaho  Code  §§22-3201-23-3202;  22-4301-22-4302 

Rainfall — Artificial  Production 

Sec. 

22-3201.  Registration  of  producers  of  artificial  rainfall. 
22-3202.  Log  of  activities  filed  with  department  of  agriculture. 

22-3201.  Registration  of  producers  of  artificial  rainfall. — Any  person,  persons, 
association,  firm,  or  corporation  conducting  or  intending  to  conduct  within  the 
state  of  Idaho  operations  to  assist  artificially  in  production  of  or  to  produce 
artificially  rainfall  shall  register  with  the  department  of  agriculture  of  the 
state  of  Idaho. 

Such  registration  shall  require  the  filing  of  the  name  of  the  person,  asso- 
ciation, or  corporation,  its  residence,  or  principal  place  of  business  in  the 
state  of  Idaho  and  the  general  nature  of  the  business  to  be  conducted.  [1957,  ch. 
106,  §  1,  p.  184.] 

22-3202.  Log  of  activities  filed  with  department  of  agriculture. — Such  person, 
persons,  association,  firm  or  corporation  shall  thereafter  file  with  the  said 


532 


department  of  agriculture  a  log  of  all  its  activities  in  the  production,  artificially, 
within  this  state,  of  rainfall.  [1957,  ch.  106,  §  2,  p.  184.] 

Chapter  43 — Weather  Modification  Districts 

Sec. 

2-4301 .  Establishment — Petition — Election. 

22-4302.  Weather  modification  fund — Creation — Administration. 

22-4301.  Establishment — Petition — Election. —  (1)  The  county  commissioners 
of  any  county  shall,  upon  petition  signed  by  not  less  than  fifty  (50)  resident  real 
property  holders  of  said  county,  or  any  portion  thereof,  which  may  exclude 
incorporated  cities,  undertake  the  following  procedure  to  determine  the  advis- 
ability of  resolving  to  establish  and  maintain  a  weather  modification  district 
within  the  county  as  may  be  designated  in  the  petition. 

(a)  A  petition  to  form  a  weather  modification  district  shall  be  presented 
to  the  county  clerk  and  recorder.  The  petition  shall  be  signed  by  not  less 
than  fifty  (50)  of  the  resident  real  property  holders  within  the  proposed 
district. 

(b)  The  petition  shall  be  filed  with  the  county  clerk  and  recorder  of  the 
county  in  which  the  signers  of  the  petition  are  located.  Upon  the  filing  of  the 
petition  the  county  clerk  shall  examine  the  petition  and  certify  whether  the 
required  number  of  petitioners  have  signed  the  petition.  If  the  number  of 
petition  signers  is  sufficient,  the  clerk  shall  transmit  the  petition  to  the 
board  or  county  commissioners. 

(c)  Upon  receipt  of  a  duly  certified  petition  the  board  of  county  com- 
missioners shall  give  notice  of  an  election  to  be  held  in  such  proposed  district 
for  the  purpose  of  determining  whether  or  not  the  proposed  district  shall 
be  organized  and  to  elect  the  first  board  of  trustees  for  the  district.  Such 
notice  shall  include  the  date  and  hours  of  the  election,  the  polling  places,  the 
maximum  number  of  mills  which  the  proposed  district  will  be  permitted 
to  levy,  the  general  purposes  of  the  proposed  district,  a  description  of 
lands  to  be  included  in  the  proposed  district,  a  statement  that  a  map  of 
the  proposed  district  is  available  in  the  office  of  the  board  of  county  com- 
missioners, and  the  names  and  terms  of  the  members  to  he  elected  to  the 
first  board  of  trustees.  The  notice  shall  be  published  once  each  week  for  three 
(3)  consecutive  weeks  prior  to  such  election,  in  a  newspaper  of  general  cir- 
culation within  the  county. 

(d)  The  election  shall  be  held  and  conducted  as  nearly  as  may  he  in  the 
same  manner  as  general  elections  in  this  state,  except  that  electors  need  not 
be  registered  in  order  to  vote  in  such  election.  The  board  of  county  com- 
missioners shall  appoint  three  (3)  judges  of  election,  one  (1)  of  whom  shall 
act  as  cleark  for  the  election.  Each  elector  may  be  required  to  take  an  oath 
that  he  is  a  resident  of  the  proposed  district,  and  otherwise  possesses  all  the 
qualifications  of  an  elector  before  casting  his  vote.  At  such  election  the 
electors  shall  vote  for  or  against  the  organization  of  the  district,  and  the 
members  of  the  fisrt  board  of  trustees. 

(e)  The  judges  of  election  shall  certify  the  returns  of  the  election  to  the 
board  of  county  commissioners.  If  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  at  said 
election  are  in  favor  of  the  organization,  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
shall  declare  the  district  organized  and  give  it  a  name  by  which,  in  all 
proceedings,  it  shall  thereafter  be  known,  and  shall  further  designate  the 
first  board  of  trustees  elected,  and  thereupon  the  district  shall  be  a  legal 
taxing  district. 

(f)  On  the  second  Tuesday  of  January,  in  the  second  calendar  year  after 
the  organization  of  any  district,  and  on  the  second  Tuesday  of  January 
every  year  thereafter  an  election  shall  be  held,  which  shall  be  known  as 
the  annual  election  of  the  district. 

Al  tlx1  first  annual  election  in  any  district  hereafter  organized,  and  each 
third  year  thereafter,  there  shall  be  elected  by  the  qualified  electors  of  the 
district,  one  (1)  member  of  the  board  to  serve  for  a  term  of  three  (3)  years  :  at 
the  second  annual  election  and  each  third  year  thereafter,  there  shall  be  elected 
one  I  1  )  member  of  the  board  to  serve  for  a  term  of  three  (3)  years,  and  at  the 
third  annual  election,  and  each  third  year  thereafter,  there  shall  be  elected  one 
(1)  member  of  the  board  to  serve  for  a  term  of  three  (3)  years. 

Not  later  than  thirty  (30)  days  before  any  such  election,  nominations  may 
be  filed  with  the  secretary  of  the  board  and  if  a  nominee  does  not  withdraw  his 


533 


name  before  the  first  publication  of  the  notice  of  election,  his  name  shall  be 
placed  on  the  ballot.  The  board  shall  provide  for  holding  such  election  and 
shall  appoint  judges  to  conduct  it.  The  secretary  of  the  district  shall  give  notice 
of  election  by  publication,  and  shall  arrange  such  other  details  in  connection 
therewith  as  the  board  may  direct.  The  returns  of  the  election  shall  be  certified  to 
and  shall  be  canvassed  and  declared  by  the  board.  The  candidate  or  candidates 
receiving  the  most  votes  shall  be  eleced.  [1975,  ch.  145,  §  1,  p.  334.] 

22-4302.  Weather  modification  fund — Creation — Administration. — The  board 
of  trustees  of  a  weather  modification  district  shall  conduct  the  affairs  of  the 
district.  The  board  of  trustees  shall  certify  a  budget  to  the  board  of  county 
commissioners  to  fund  the  operations  of  the  district.  The  budget  preparation, 
hearings  and  approval  shall  be  the  same  as  required  for  any  county  budget. 
The  certification  of  the  budget  to  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  be 
as  required  for  other  taxing  districts.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  may 
levy  annually  upon  all  taxable  property  in  the  weather  modification  district,  a 
tax  not  to  exceed  four  (4)  mills,  to  be  collected  and  paid  into  the  county 
treasury  and  apportioned  to  a  fund  to  be  designated  the  "weather  modification" 
fund,  which  is  hereby  created.  Such  fund  shall  be  used  by  the  district  for  the 
gathering  of  information  upon,  aiding  in  or  conducting  programs  for  weather 
control  or  modification,  and  such  activities  related  to  weather  modification 
programs  as  are  necessary  to  insure  the  full  benefit  of  such  programs.  Moneys  in 
the  fund  may  be  paid  out  only  on  order  of  the  board  of  trustees.  [1975,  ch.  145, 
§2,  p.  334.] 

Illinois 

111.  Ann.  Stat.  ch.  146     §§  1-32 

Chapter  146% 
weather  [new] 

Sec. 

1.  Short  title. 

2.  Declaration  of  purpose. 

3.  Definitions. 

3.01  Department. 

3.02  Director. 

3.03  Board. 

3.04  Weather  modification. 

3.05  Person. 

3.06  Operation. 

3.07  Research  and  Development. 

3.08  License. 

3.09  Licensee. 

3.10  Permit. 

3.11  Permittee. 

4.  Administration. 

5.  Weather  Modification  Board. 

6.  Regulations. 

7.  Investigations. 

8.  Hearings. 

9.  Interstate  compacts. 

10.  License  and  permit  required. 

11.  Exemptions. 

12.  Issuance  of  license. 

13.  License  fee. 

14.  Expiration  date. 

15.  Renewal  of  license. 

16.  Suspension,  revocation,  refusal  to  renew  a  license. 

17.  Issuance  of  permit. 

18.  Permit  fee. 

19.  Scope  of  permit. 

20.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility. 

21.  Modification  of  permit. 

22.  Renewal  of  permit. 

23.  Suspension,  revocation,  refusal  to  renew  permit. 

24.  Recreation  of  license  or  permit. 

25.  Review  under  Administrative  Review  Act — Venue — Costs. 

26.  Records  and  reports. 

27.  State  immunity. 

28.  Liability. 

29.  Penalty  for  violations. 

30.  Suits  to  recover  fines,  penalties  or  fees. 

31.  Injunction  to  restrain  violations. 

32.  Partial  invalidity. 


534 


WEATHER  MODIFICATION  CONTROL  ACT 

The  Weather  Modification  Control  Act  was  enacted  as  Article  I 
of  P.A.  78-674 ;  Article  II  consisted  of  amendments  of  related  acts. 

§i.  Short  title 

This  Act  shall  be  known  and  may  be  cited  as  the  "Weather  Modification 
Control  Act".  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  1,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

TITLE  OF  ACT 

An  Act  to  regulate  weather  modification  in  this  State  and  amending  certain 
Acts  therein  named  in  connection  therewith.  Approved  by  P.A.  78-674,  eff. 
Oct.  1,  1973. 

§  2.  Declaration  of  purpose 

(a)  The  General  Assembly  hereby  declares  that  weather  modification  affects 
the  public  health,  safety  and  welfare  and  the  environment,  and  is  subject  to 
regulation  and  control  in  the  public  interest.  Properly  conducted  weather 
modification  operations  can  improve  water  quality  and  quantity,  reduce  losses 
from  weather  hazards  and  provide  economic  benefits  for  the  people  of  the 
State.  Therefore  weather  modification  operations  and  research  and  develop- 
ment shall  be  encouraged.  In  order  to  minimize  possible  adverse  effects,  weather 
modification  activities  shall  be  carried  on  with  proper  safeguards,  and  accurate 
information  concerning  such  activities  shall  be  recorded  and  reported  to  the 
Department  of  Registration  and  Education. 

(b)  This  Act  shall  be  liberally  construed  to  carry  out  these  objectives  and 
purposes.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §2,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.  Definitions 

As  used  in  this  Act  unless  the  context  otherwise  requires,  the  terms  specified 
in  Sections  3.01  through  3.11  have  the  meanings  ascribed  to  them  in  those 
Sections.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §3,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.01.  Department 

"Department"  means  the  Department  of  Registration  and  Education.  (P.A. 
78-674,  Art.  I,  §3.01,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.02  Director 

"Director"  means  the  Director  of  Registration  and  Education.  (P.A.  78-674, 
Art.  I  §3.02,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.03  Board 

"Board"  means  the  Weather  Modification  Board  appointed  pursuant  to 
this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  3.03,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.04  Weather  modification 

"Weather  modification"  means  any  activity  performed  with  the  intention 
of  producing  artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  motions  and  resulting 
behavior  of  the  atmosphere.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §3.04,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.05  Person 

"Person"  means  any  individual,  corporation,  company,  association,  firm, 
partnership,  society,  joint  stock  company,  any  State  or  local  government  or 
any  agency  thereof,  or  any  other  organization,  whether  commercial  or  non- 
profit, who  is  performing  weather  modification  operations  or  research  and 
development,  except  where  acting  solely  as  an  employee,  agent  or  independent 
contractor  of  the  United  States  of  America  or  any  agency  thereof.  "Person" 
does  not  include  the  United  States  of  America  or  any  agency  thereof.  (P.A.  78- 
674,  Art.  1,  §3.05,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§3.06  Operation 

"Operation"  means  the  performance  of  any  weather  modification  activity 
undertaken  for  the  purpose  of  producing  or  attempting  to  produce  any  form  of 
modifying  effect  upon  the  weather  within  a  specified  geographical  area  over  a 
specified  time  interval.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §3.06,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

%3.07  Research  and  Development 

"Research  and  Development"  means  exploration,  filed  experimentation  and 
extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a  scientific  or  technical 


535 


nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and  demonstration  purposes, 
including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of  models,  devices,  equip- 
ment, materials  and  processes.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §3.07,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.08  License 

"License"  means  a  professional  license  issued  by  the  Director  indicating 
that  a  specified  person  has  met  the  standards  for  certification  as  a  weather 
modifier  and  is  approved  to  conduct  weather  modification  operations  for  which 
permits  have  been  issued  under  this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  3.08,  eff.  Oct.  1, 
1973.) 

§  3.09  Licensee 

"Licensee"  means  a  person  who  holds  a  professional  weather  modification 
license  issued  under  this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  3.09,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  3.10  Permit 

"Permit"  means  an  operational  permit  issued  by  the  Director  indicating 
that  approval  has  been  given  for  conducting  a  specified  weather  modification 
operation  within  the  State  subject  to  the  conditions  and  within  the  limitations 
established  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  3.10,  eff. 
Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  3.11  Permittee 

"Permittee"  means  a  person  who  holds  an  operational  permit  issued  under 
this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  3.11,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  4-  Administration 

(a)  The  powers  and  duties  enumerated  in  this  Act  shall  be  exercised  by 
the  Director. 

(b)  The  Director  shall  exercise  the  powers  and  duties  enumerated  in  this 
Act,  except  those  enumerated  in  Section  5,  only  upon  the  recommendation 
and  report  in  writing  of  the  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Board  (P.A. 
78-674,  Art.  I,  §  4,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  5.  Weather  Modification  Board 

There  is  created  the  Weather  Modification  Board  to  be  composed  of  5  resi- 
dents of  the  State  who  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Director.  In  selecting  members 
of  the  Board  the  Director  shall  include  individuals  with  qualifications  and 
practical  experience  in  agriculture,  law,  meteorology  and  water  resources. 

The  Director  shall  appoint  one  member  of  the  Board  to  a  term  of  one  year, 
2  members  to  terms  of  2  years  and  2  members  to  terms  of  3  years,  commencing 
January  1,  1974.  After  expiration  of  the  terms  of  the  members  first  appointed 
pursuant  to  this  Act,  each  of  their  respective  successors  shall  hold  office  for 
a  term  of  3  years  and  until  their  successors  are  appointed  and  qualified.  Mem- 
bers of  the  Board  shall  be  eligible  for  re-appointment. 

In  the  event  a  member  of  the  Board  shall  be  disqualified  from  considering 
business  before  the  Board  because  of  a  conflict  of  interest,  the  Director  may 
appoint  a  resident  of  the  State  to  serve  temporarily  on  the  Board.  After  the 
Board  decides  upon  its  recommendation  to  the  Director  concerning  such  business 
the  member  will  resume  his  position  on  the  Board. 

The  chairman  of  the  Board  shall  be  designated  by  the  Director  from  among 
the  members. 

Each  member  of  the  Board  shall  be  paid  the  sum  of  $25  for  every  day  he 
is  actually  engaged  in  its  services,  and  shall  be  reimbursed  for  such  actual  and 
necessary  expenses  as  he  may  incur  in  performance  of  the  functions  of  the 
Board. 

The  Board  shall  hold  an  annual  meeting  at  Springfield,  Illinois,  and  such 
other  meetings  at  such  times  and  places  and  upon  such  notice  as  the  Board 
may  determine.  Three  members  of  the  Board  shall  constitute  a  quorum  for 
performance  of  its  function.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  5,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  6.  Regulations 

The  Department  shall  make  reasonable  rules  and  regulations  necessary  to  the 
exercise  of  its  powers  and  the  performance  of  its  duties  under  this  Act. 

In  order  to  effectuate  the  objectives  and  purposes  of  this  Act,  the  Department 
shall  make  reasonable  rules  and  regulations  establishing  qualifications,  proce- 
dures and  conditions  for  issuance,  renewal,  revocation,  suspension,  refusal  to 
renew,  refusal  to  issue,  restoration  and  modification  of  licenses  and  permits. 


536 


In  order  to  minimize  possible  adverse  effects  to  the  public  health,  safety  and 
welfare '  and  the  environment,  the  Department  shall  make  reasonable  rules 
and  regulations  establishing  standards  and  instructions  to  govern  weather  mod- 
ification operations  and  research  and  development. 

In  order  to  make  accurate  information  available  concerning  weather  modifica- 
tion operations  and  research  and  development  in  the  State,  the  Department 
shall  make  reasonable  rules  and  regulations  requiring  record  keeping  and 
reporting  and  shall  establish  procedures  and  forms  for  such  record  keeping  and 
reporting.  (P. A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  6,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  7.  Investigation* 

The  Department  shall  have  the  power  to  investigate  the  weather  modification 
operations  and  research  and  development  of  any  person  holding  or  claiming 
to  hold  a  license  or  a  permit  issued  under  this  Act. 

Duly  authorized  agents  of  the  Department  shall  have  the  power  to  enter  and 
inspect  any  place  in  which  there  is  reasonable  belief  that  weather  modification 
operations  or  research  and  development  is  taking  place,  in  which  weather 
modfication  operations  or  research  and  development  is  in  fact  taking  place  and 
the  premises  of  any  person  holding  a  permit  issued  under  this  Act.  (P. A.  78-674, 
Art.  I,  §  7,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973. ) 

§  8.  Hearings 

Except  for  emergency  modifications  of  operational  permits  as  provided  for  in 
Section  21(b)  of  this  Act,  before  suspending,  revoking,  refusing  to  renew  or 
modifying  a  license  or  a  permit,  the  Department  shall  issue  a  citation  notifying 
the  licensee  or  permittee  of  the  time  and  place  when  and  where  a  hearing  of  the 
matter  shall  be  had.  Such  citation  shall  contain  a  statement  of  the  reasons  for 
the  proposed  action.  Such  citation  shall  be  served  on  the  licensee  or  permittee 
at  least  10  days  prior  to  the  date  therein  set  for  the  hearing,  either  by  delivery 
of  the  citation  personally  to  the  licensee  or  permittee  or  by  mailing  it  by  regis- 
tered mail  to  his  last  known  place  of  business. 

The  Department  shall  hear  the  matter  at  the  time  and  place  fixed  in  such 
citation  unless  the  licensee  or  permittee  waives  his  right  to  a  hearing.  Both  the 
Department  and  the  licensee  or  permittee  shall  be  accorded  ample  opportunity 
to  present,  in  person  or  by  counsel,  such  statements,  testimony,  evidence  and 
argument  as  may  be  pertinent  to  the  matter. 

The  Department  may  continue  such  hearing  from  time  to  time.  If  the  Depart- 
ment shall  not  be  sitting  at  the  time  and  place  fixed  in  the  citation  or  at  the 
time  and  place  to  which  a  hearing  shall  have  been  continued,  the  Department 
shall  continue  such  hearing  for  a  period  not  to  exceed  30  days. 

Any  circuit  court  or  any  judge  thereof,  upon  the  application  of  the  licensee 
or  permittee  or  of  the  Department,  may  by  order  duly  entered,  require  the 
attendance  of  witnesses  and  the  production  of  relevant  books,  records,  docu- 
ments and  instruments  before  the  Department  in  any  hearing  relative  to  refusal 
to  renew,  suspension,  revocation  or  modification  of  a  license  or  a  permit,  and 
the  court  or  judge  may  compel  obedience  to  its  or  his  order  by  proceedings  for 
contempt. 

In  conducting  any  hearing,  the  Department  or  a  representative  designated 
by  it  may  administer  oaths  and  examine  witnesses. 

The  Department,  at  its  expense,  shall  provide  a  stenographer  to  record  the 
testimony  and  preserve  a  record  of  all  proceedings  at  the  hearing  of  any  case 
wherein  a  license  or  permit  is  revoked,  suspended,  not  renewed  or  modified.  The 
notice  of  hearing  and  all  other  documents  in  the  nature  of  pleadings  and  written 
motions  filed  in  the  proceedings,  the  transcript  of  testimonv,  the  report  of  the 
Board  and  the  orders  of  the  Department  constitute  the  record  of  such  pro- 
ceedings. (P.A.  78-674,  Art,  §8,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  9.  Interstate  compacts 

The  Department  may  represent  the  State  in  matters  pertaining  to  plans, 
procedures  or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  related  to  weather  modifica- 
ion.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §9,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  10.  License  and  permit  required 

Except  as  provided  in  Section  11  of  this  Act,  no  person  may  engage  in  weather 
modification  activities : 

(a)  Without  both  a  professional  weather  modification  license  issued  under 
Section  12  of  this  Act  and  a  weather  modification  operational  permit  issued 
under  Section  18  of  this  Act ;  or 


537 


(b)  In  violation  of  any  term,  condition  or  limitation  of  such  license  or  permit 
(P. A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §10,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  11.  Exemptions 

(a)  The  Department  may  provide  by  rules  and  regulations  for  exemption 
of  the  following  activities  from  the  license  and  permit  requirements  of  this 
Act: 

(1)  Research  and  development  conducted  by  the  State,  its  subdivisions 
and  agencies  of  the  State  and  of  its  subdivisions,  institutions  of  higher 
learning  and  bona  fide  research  corporations  ; 

(2)  Activities  for  protection  against  fire,  frost  or  fog;  and 

(3)  Activities  normally  conducted  for  purposes  other  than  inducing, 
increasing,  decreasing  or  preventing  hail,  precipitation,  or  tornadoes. 

(b)  Exempted  activities  shall  be  so  conducted  as  not  to  interfere  with 
weather  modification  operations  conducted  under  a  permit  issued  in  accord- 
ance with  this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  11,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  12.  Issuance  of  license 

(a)  The  Department  shall  provide  by  rules  and  regulations  the  procedure  and 
criteria  for  issuance  of  licenses.  Criteria  established  by  rules  and  regulations 
shall  be  consistent  with  the  qualifications  recognized  by  national  or  international 
professional  and  scientific  associations  concerned  with  weather  modification 
and  meteorology,  and  shall  be  designed  to  carry  out  the  objectives  and  pur- 
poses of  this  Act. 

(b)  The  Department,  in  accordance  with  its  rules  and  regulations,  shall  issue 
a  weather  modification  license  to  each  applicant  who  : 

(1)  Pays  the  license  fee  established  by  Section  13  of  this  Act ;  and 

(2)  Demonstrates,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Department,  competence 
necessary  to  engage  in  weather  modification  operations. 

(c)  If  an  applicant  for  a  license  does  not  pay  the  license  fee  established  by 
Section  13  of  this  Act  or  does  not  demonstrate,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
Department,  competence  necessary  to  engage  in  weather  modification  operations, 
the  Department  shall  deny  the  application  for  the  license.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I, 
§  12.  Eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§73.  License  fee 

The  fee  for  an  original  license  is  $100.  The  fee  for  a  renewal  license  is  $20. 
(P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  13,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  Ut.  Expiration  date 

Each  original  or  renewal  license  shall  expire  on  October  31  of  each  vear, 
<P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  14,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  15.  Renewal  of  license 

At  the  expiration  of  the  license  period,  the  Department  shall  issue  a  renewal 
license  to  each  applicant  who  pays  the  renewal  license  fee  established  by  Section 
13  of  this  Act,  and  who  has  the  qualifications  then  necessary  for  issuance  of  an 
original  license.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  15,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  16.  Suspension,  revocation,  refusal  to  renew  a  license 

The  Department  may  suspend,  revoke  or  refuse  to  renew  a  license  for  any 
one  or  combination  of  the  following  causes  : 

( a )  Incompetency  ; 

( b )  Dishonest  practice  ; 

(c)  False  or  fraudulent  representation  in  obtaining  a  license  or  permit 
under  this  Act ; 

(d)  Failure  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  or  any  of 
the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  Department  made  under  this  Act ;  and 

(e)  Aiding  other  persons  to  fail  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  or  any  of  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  Department  made  under 
this  Act. 

(P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  16,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 
§  77.  Issuance  of  permit 

(a)  The  Department  shall  provide  by  rules  and  regulations  the  procedure  and 
criteria  for  issuance  of  permits.  Criteria  established  by  rules  and  regulations 
shall  be  designed  to  carry  out  the  objectives  and  purposes  of  this  Act, 


538 


(b)  A. person  applying  for  a  weather  modification  operational  permit  shall  file 
with  the  Department  an  application  which  shall  contain  such  information  as  the 
Department  by  rules  and  regulations  may  require  and  which  in  addition  shall: 

(1 )  List  the  name  and  address  of  the  applicant ; 

(2)  List  the  name  and  address  of  the  person  on  whose  behalf  the  opera- 
tion is  to  be  conducted  ; 

(3)  Indicate  that  the  applicant  holds,  or  if  the  applicant  is  an  organiza- 
tion rather  than  an  individual,  demonstrates  that  the  individual  in  control 
of  the  project  holds  a  valid  professional  weather  modification  license  issued 
under  Section  12  of  this  Act ; 

(4)  Furnish  proof  of  financial  responsibility  in  accordance  with  Section 
20  of  this  Act ;  and 

(5)  Set  forth  a  complete  operational  plan  for  the  project  which  includes  a 
specific  statement  of  its  nature  and  object,  a  map  of  the  proposed  operating 
area  which  specifies  the  primary  target  area  and  shows  the  area  reasonably 
expected  to  be  affected,  a  statement  of  the  approximate  time  during  which 
the  operation  is  to  be  conduced,  a  list  of  the  materials  and  methods  to  be 
used  in  conducting  the  operation,  an  emergency  shut  down  procedure  which 
states  conditions  under  which  operations  must  be  suspended  because  of 
possible  danger  to  the  public  health,  safety  and  welfare  or  to  the  environ- 
ment, and  such  other  detailed  information  as  may  be  required  to  describe  the 
operation. 

(c)  The  Department  may  give  public  notice  by  newspaper,  radio  or  television 
announcement  in  the  area  of  the  State  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected  by 
operations  conducted  under  a  permit  that  it  is  considering  an  application  for 
a  permit,  and  may  hold  a  public  hearing  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  information 
from  the  public  concerning  the  effects  of  issuing  or  refusing  to  issue  the  permit. 

(d)  The  Department  may  issue  the  operational  permit  if  it  determines  that : 

(1)  The  applicant  holds,  or  if  the  applicant  is  an  organization  rather 
than  an  individual,  demonstrates  that  the  individual  in  control  of  the 
project  holds  a  valid  professional  weather  modification  license  issued  under 
section  12  of  this  Act ; 

(2)  The  applicant  has  furnished  proof  of  financial  responsibility  in 
accordance  with  Section  20  of  this  Act ; 

(3)  The  project  is  reasonably  conceived  to  improve  water  quality  or 
quantity,  reduce  losses  from  weather  hazards,  provide  economic  benefits 
for  the  people  of  the  State,  advance  or  enhance  scientific  knowledge  or 
otherwise  carry  out  the  objectives  and  purposes  of  this  Act ; 

(4)  The  project  is  designed  to  include  adequate  safeguards  to  minimize 
possible  damage  to  the  public  health,  safety  or  welfare  or  to  the  environment ; 

(5)  The  project  will  not  adversely  affect  another  operation  for  which  a 
permit  has  been  issued  ; 

(6)  The  applicant  has  complied  with  the  permit  fee  requirement  estab- 
lished by  Section  18  of  this  Act ;  and 

(7)  The  applicant  has  complied  with  and  the  project  conforms  to  such 
other  criteria  for  issuance  of  permits  as  have  been  established  by  rules 
and  regulations  of  the  Department  made  under  this  Act. 

(e)  In  order  to  carry  out  the  objectives  and  purposes  of  this  Act,  the  Depart- 
ment may  condition  and  limit  permits  as  to  primary  target  area,  time  of  the 
operation,  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation,  emer- 
gency shut  down  procedure  and  such  other  operational  requirements  as  may  be 
established  by  the  Department. 

(  f )  A  separate  permit  shall  be  required  for  each  operation. 

(g)  The  Department  shall  issue  only  one  permit  at  a  time  for  operations  in 
any  geographic  area  if  2  or  more  operations  conducted  within  the  conditions 
and  limits  of  the  permits  might  adversely  interfere  with  each  other.  (P.A.  78-674, 
Art.  I,  §  17,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  18.  Permit  fee 

(a)  The  fee  for  each  permit  or  renewal  thereof  shall  be  a  minimum  of  $100. 

0>)  If  the  operation  will  be  conducted  under  contract  and  the  value  of  the 
contract  is  more  than  $10,000,  the  fee  for  the  permit  or  renewal  thereof  shall 
be  equivalent  to  one  per  cent  of  the  value  of  the  contract. 

(c)  II"  the  operation  will  not  be  conducted  under  contract  and  the  estimated 
costs  of  the  operation  are  more  than  $10,000,  the  fee  for  the  permit  or  renewal 
thereof  shall  be  equivalent  to  one  per  cent  of  the  estimated  costs  of  the  opera- 


539 


tion  The  costs  of  the  operation  shall  be  estimated  by  the  Department  from 
information  given  to  it  by  the  applicant  for  the  permit  or  renewal  thereof 
and  such  other  information  as  may  be  available  to  the  Department. 

(d)  The  permit  fee  is  due  and  payable  to  the  Department  prior  to  issuance 
of  the  permit  or  renewal  thereof.  (P. A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  18,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

%  19.  Scope  of  permit 

(a)  A  separate  permit  is  required  for  each  operation.  When  an  operation 
is  conducted  under  contract,  a  permit  is  required  for  each  separate  contract. 

(b)  Except  as  provided  in  subsection  (c)  of  this  Section,  each  permit  or 
renewal  permit  shall  expire  one  year  from  the  date  of  its  issuance. 

(c)  The  Department  may  conditionally  approve  a  project  for  a  continuous 
time  period  in  excess  of  one  year's  duration.  Permits  for  such  operations 
must  be  renewed  annually.  In  approving  the  renewal  of  a  permit  for  a  con- 
tinuous program,  the  Department  shall  review  and  approve  the  permittee's 
operational  record,  and  then  may  issue  a  renewal  of  the  permit  for  the  opera- 
tion to  continue.  m  ,  . 

(d)  The  permittee  shall  confine  his  activities  within  the  limits  specified  m 
the  permit,  except  to  the  extent  that  the  limits  are  modified  by  the  Depart- 
ment. The  permittee  shall  comply  with  any  conditions  of  the  permit  as  orig- 
inally issued  or  as  subsequently  modified  by  the  Department.  (P. A.  78-674, 
Art.  I,  §  19,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

%  20.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility 

Proof  of  financial  responsibility  is  made  by  showing  to  the  satisfaction  of 
the  Department  that  the  permittee  has  the  ability  to  respond  in  damages  to 
liability  which  might  reasonably  result  from  the  operation  for  which  the  per- 
mit is  sought.  Such  proof  of  financial  responsibility  may,  but  shall  not  be  re- 
quired to,  be  shown  by  : 

(a)  Presentation  to  the  Department  of  proof  of  a  prepaid  noncancellable 
insurance  policy  against  such  liabilities  in  an  amount  set  by  the  Department; 
or 

(b)  Filing  with  the  Department  a  corporate  surety  bond,  cash  or  negotiable 
securities  in  an  amount  approved  by  the  Department.  (P. A.  78-674,  Art.  I, 
§20,  eff.  Oct.  i,  1973.) 

§  21.  Modification  of  permit 

(a)  The  Department  may  revise  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit  if: 

(1)  The  permittee  is  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a 
hearing  on  the  need  for  a  revision  in  accordance  with  Section  8  of  this 
Act ;  and 

(2)  It  appears  to  the  Department  that  a  modification  of  the  conditions 
and  limits  of  a  permit  is  necessary  to  protect  the  public  health,  safety 
and  welfare  or  the  environment. 

(b)  If  it  appears  to  the  Department  that  an  emergency  situation  exists  or 
is  impending  which  could  endanger  the  public  health,  safety  or  welfare  or 
the  environment,  the  Department  may,  without  prior  notice  or  a  hearing, 
immediately  modify  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit,  or  order  temporary 
suspension  of  the  permit.  The  issuance  of  such  an  order  shall  include  notice 
of  a  hearing  to  be  held  within  10  days  thereafter  on  the  question  of  perma- 
nently modifying  the  conditions  and  limits  or  continuing  the  suspension  of 
the  permit.  Failure  to  comply  with  an  order  temporarily  suspending  an  op- 
eration or  modifying  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit  shall  be  grounds 
for  immediate  revocation  of  the  permit  and  of  the  license  of  the  person  con- 
trolling the  operation. 

(c)  It  shall  be  the  responsibility  of  the  permittee  to  notify  the  Department 
of  any  emergency  which  can  reasonably  be  foreseen,  or  of  any  existing  emer- 
gency situations  which  might  be  caused  or  affected  by  the  operation.  Failure 
by  the  permittee  to  so  notify  the  Department  of  any  such  existing  emergency, 
or  any  impending  emergency  which  should  have  been  foreseen,  may  be  grounds, 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Department,  for  revocation  of  the  permit  and  of  the 
license  of  the  person  controlling  the  operation.  (P. A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  21,  eff. 
Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  22.  Renewal  of  permit 

At  the  expiration  of  the  permit  period,  the  Department  shall  issue  a  renewal 
permit  to  each  applicant  who  pays  the  permit  fee  and  whose  operational  record 


540 


indicates  that  an  original  permit  would  be  issuable  for  the  operation.  (P. A. 
78-674,  Art.  I,  §  22,  eg.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  23.  Suspension,  revocation,  refusal  to  renew  permit 

(a)  The  Department  may  suspend  or  revoke  a  permit  if  it  appears  that  the 
permittee  no  longer  has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  an 
original  permit  or  has  violated  any  provision  of  this  Act  or  of  any  of  the  rules 
and  regulations  issued  under  this  Act. 

(b)  The  Department  may  refuse  to  renew  a  permit  if  it  appears  from  the 
operational  records  and  reports  of  the  permittee  that  an  original  permit  would 
not  be  issuable  for  the  operation,  or  if  the  permittee  has  violated  any  provi- 
sion of  this  Act  or  of  any  of  the  rules  and  regulations  issued  under  this  Act. 
i  P. A.  7^674.  Art.  I.  §  23,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  2Jf.  Restoration  of  license  or  permit 

(a)  At  any  time  after  the  suspension  or  revocation  of  a  license  or  permit 
the  Department  may  restore  it  to  the  licensee  or  permittee  upon  a  finding  that 
the  requirements  for  issuance  of  an  original  license  or  permit  have  been  met  by 
the  licensee  or  permittee. 

(b)  At  any  time  after  the  refusal  to  renew  a  license  or  permit  the  Depart- 
ment may  renew  it  upon  a  finding  that  the  requirements  for  issuance  of  an 
original  license  or  permit  have  been  met  by  the  licensee  or  permittee.  (P. A. 
78-674,  Art.  I,  §24,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  25.  Review  under  Administrative  Review  Act — Venue — Costs 

(a)  All  final  administrative  decisions  of  the  Department  are  subject  to 
judicial  review  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  the  "Administrative  Review 
Act",  approved  May  8,  1945,  and  all  amendments  and  modifications  thereof, 
and  the  rules  adopted  pursuant  thereto.1  The  term  "administrative  decision'' 
is  defined  as  in  Section  1  of  tht  "Administrative  Review  Act".2 

(b)  Such  proceedings  for  judicial  review  shall  be  commenced  in  the  circuit 
court  of  the  county  in  which  the  party  applying  for  review  resides ;  but  if  such 
party  is  not  a  resident  of  this  State,  the  venue  shall  be  in  Sangamon  County. 

(c)  The  Department  shall  not  be  required  to  certify  any  record  to  the  circuit 
court  or  file  any  answer  in  the  circuit  court  or  otherwise  appear  in  any  court 
in  a  judicial  review  proceeding,  unless  there  is  filed  in  the  court  with  the 
complaint  a  receipt  from  the  Department  acknowledging  payment  of  the  costs 
of  furnishing  and  certifying  the  record.  The  costs  shall  be  computed  at  the  rate 
of  fifty  cents  per  page.  Failure  on  the  part  of  the  plaintiff  to  file  such  receipt  in 
court  shall  be  grounds  for  dismissal  of  the  action.  (P. A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  25, 
eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  26.  Records  and  reports 

(a)  In  order  to  aid  in  research  and  development  of  weather  modification 
and  to  aid  in  the  protection  of  the  public  health,  safety  and  welfare  and  the 
environment,  any  person  conducting  any  weather  modification  in  Illinois  or 
elsewhere  by  undertaking  operations  within  Illinois,  shall  keep  such  records 
and  file  such  reports  at  such  time  or  times  and  in  the  manner  and  form  as 
may  be  required  by  the  rules  and  regulations  made  under  this  Act. 

(b)  Record  and  report  forms  may  be  developed  by  the  Department  showing 
the  method  of  weather  modification  employed  in  the  operation,  the  type  of 
equipment  used,  the  kind  and  amount  of  each  material  used,  the  times  and 
places  the  equipment  was  operated,  the  times  when  there  was  modifiable 
weather  but  the  permittee  did  not  operate  and  the  reasons  therefor,  the  name 
and  address  of  each  individual,  other  than  the  licensee,  who  participates  or 
assists  in  the  operation,  the  manner  in  which  operations  do  not  conform  to  the 
conditions  and  limits  of  the  permit  as  established  according  to  Section  17(e) 
or  as  modified  under  Section  21,  weather  observations  and  records  specified  by 
the  Department  and  any  other  necessary  data  the  Department  may  require 
under  its  rules  and  regulations. 

(c)  The  records  and  reports  which  are  the  custody  of  the  Department 
and  which  have  been  filed  with  it  under  this  Act  or  under  the  rules  and  regula- 
tions made  under  this  Act  shall  be  kept  open  for  public  examination  as  'public 
(!<"•', ments.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I.  §26,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 


rhapter  no.  §  204  ot  spq. 
«  Chapter  110.  §  204. 


541 


§  27.  State  immunity 

Nothing  in  this  Act  shall  be  construed  to  impose  or  accept  any  liability  or 
responsibility  by  the  State,  its  agencies  and  the  officers  and  employees  thereof 
for  anv  injury  caused  bv  any  persons  who  conduct  weather  modification  opera- 
tions. \p.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §27,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973.) 

§  28.  Liability 

(a)  An  operation  conducted  under  the  license  and  permit  requirements  of 
this  Act  is  not  an  ultrahazardous  or  an  abnormally  dangerous  activity  which 
makes  the  licensee  or  permittee  subject  to  liability  without  fault. 

(b)  Dissemination  of  materials  and  substances  into  the  atmosphere  by  a 
permittee  acting  within  the  conditions  and  limits  of  his  permit  shall  not  give 
rise  to  the  contention  that  such  use  of  the  atmosphere  constitutes  trespass. 

(c)  Except  as  provided  in  subsections  (a)  and  (b)  of  this  Section,  and  in 
Section  27  of  this  Act,  nothing  in  this  Act  shall  prevent  any  person  adversely 
affected  by  a  weather  modification  operation  from  recovering  damages  resulting 
from  intentional  harmful  actions  or  negligent  conduct  by  a  permitee. 

(d)  Failure  to  obtain  a  license  and  permit  before  conducting  an  operation, 
or  operational  activities  which  knowingly  constitute  a  violation  of  the  conditions 
or  limits  of  a  permit,  shall  constitute  negligence  per  se. 

(e)  The  fact  that  a  person  holds  a  license  or  was  issued  a  permit  under  this 
Act,  or  that  he  has  complied  with  the  rules  and  regulations  made  by  the 
Department  pursuant  to  this  Act,  is  not  admissible  as  a  defense  in  any  legal 
action  which  may  be  brought  against  him.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §28,  eff.  Oct.  1, 
1973.) 

§  29.  Penalty  for  violations 

Any  person  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act  or  of  any  valid  rule 
or  regulation  issued  under  this  Act  is  guilty  of  a  Class  B  misdemeanor,  and 
each  day  such  violation  continues  constitutes  a  separate  offense.  (P.A.  78-674. 
Art.  1,  §  29,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  30.  tSuits  to  recover  fines,  penalties  or  fees 

All  suits  for  the  recovery  of  any  of  the  fines,  penalties  or  fees  prescribed 
in  this  Act  shall  be  prosecuted  in  the  name  of  the  ''People  of  the  State  of  Illi- 
nois", in  any  court  having  jurisdiction,  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  State's 
Attorney  of  the  county  where  such  offense  is  committed  to  prosecute  all  persons 
violating  the  provisions  of  this  Act  upon  proper  complaint  being  made.  All  fines, 
penalties  and  fees  collected  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  inure  to  the 
Department.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §  30,  eff.  Oct.  1, 1973.) 

§  31.  Injunction  to  restrain  violations 

The  Department  may,  in  its  discretion,  in  addition  to  the  remedy  set  forth 
in  the  preceding  Section,  apply  to  a  court  having  competent  jurisdiction  over 
the  parties  and  subject  matter,  for  a  writ  of  injunction  to  restrain  repetitious 
violations  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  (P.A.  78-674,  Art.  I,  §31,  eff.  Oct.  1, 
1973. ) 

§  32.  Partial  invalidity 

If  any  portion  of  this  Act  is  held  invalid,  such  invalidity  shall  not  affect  any 
other  part  of  this  Act  which  can  be  given  effect  without  the  invalid  portion. 
( i  '.A.  78-674.  Art.  I,  §  32,  eff.  Oct.  1,  1973. ) 

Iowa 

Iowa  Code  Ann.  §§  361.1-361.7 

Chapter  361.  Weather  Modification  [New] 

Sec. 

361.1  Definitions. 

361.2  Modification  board. 

361.3  Program — contract. 

361.4  Fund. 

361.5  Election  on  question. 

361.6  Budget  request. 

361.7  Cancellation  of  program. 

Chapter  361,  Code  1958,  Township  Licenses,  consisting  of  sections 
361.1  to  361.7,  was  repealed  by  Acts  1959  (58  G.A. )  ch.  254,  §  9. 

For  provisions  relating  to  county  business  licenses,  see  §  382.23  et  seq. 

34-S37 — 79  37 


542 


Provisions  constituting  chapter  361,  Code  1973,  Weather  Modification, 
consisting  of  sections  361.1  to  361.7,  were  added  by  Acts  1972  (64  G.A.) 
ch.  1086,  §§  lto7. 

361.1  Definitions 

As  used  in  this  chapter,  unless  the  context  otherwise  requires : 

1.  "Agricultural  land"  means  any  tract  of  land  of  ten  acres  or  more  used 
for  agricultural  or  horticultural  purposes. 

2.  "Public  agency"  means  public  agency  as  defined  in  section  28E.2. 

3.  "Private  agency"  means  private  agency  as  defined  in  section  28E.2. 
(Acts  1972  (64  G.A.)  ch.  1086,  §  1.) 

361.2  3Iodification  board 

The  county  board  of  supervisors  shall,  upon  receipt  of  a  petition  signed  by 
at  least  one  hundred  owners  and  tenants  of  agricultural  land  located  in  the 
county,  establish  a  weather  modification  board  consisting  of  five  members 
appointed  by  the  board  of  supervisors  for  three-year  terms,  except  that  two 
members  of  the  initial  board  shall  be  appointed  for  two-year  terms.  In  the 
case  of  a  vacancy,  the  appointment  shall  be  made  for  the  unexpired  term. 
The  members  of  the  board  shall  organize  annually  by  the  election  of  a  chairman 
and  vice-chairman.  Meetings  shall  be  held  at  the  call  of  the  chairman  or  at  the 
request  of  the  majority  of  the  members  of  the  board.  A  majority  vote  of  the 
members  of  the  board  shall  be  required  to  determine  any  matter  relating  to 
their  duties.  (Acts.  1972  (64  G.A.)  ch.  1086,  §  2.) 

361.3  Program — contract 

The  weather  modification  board  may  : 

L  Investigate  and  study  the  feasibility  of  artificial  weather  modification 
for  the  county. 

2.  Develop  and  administer  an  artificial  weather  modification  program. 

3.  Contract  with  any  public  or  private  agency  as  provided  in  chapter  28E 
to  carry  out  an  artificial  weather  modification  program. 

4.  Request  the  county  board  of  supervisors  to  conduct  a  referendum  au- 
thorizing the  levy  and  collection  of  a  tax,  not  to  exceed  two  cents  per  acre 
on  agricultural  land  in  the  county,  for  the  administration  of  an  artificial 
weather  modification  program. 

5.  Accept,  receive,  and  administer  grants,  funds,  or  gifts  from  public  or 
private  agencies  to  develop  or  administer  an  artificial  weather  modification 
program.  (Acts  1972  (64  G.A.)  ch.  1086,  §  3.) 

3614  Fund 

There  is  created  in  the  office  of  county  treasurer  of  each  county  having  a 
weather  modification  board  a  weather  modification  fund.  Any  taxes  or  other 
funds  received  by  the  weather  modification  board  shall  be  placed  in  the  fund 
and  used  exclusively  for  the  purpose  of  artificial  weather  modification  as 
provided  in  this  chapter.  (Acts  1972  (64  G.A.)  ch.  10S6,  §  4.) 

361.5  Election  on  question 

Upon  request  of  the  weather  modification  board,  the  county  board  of  super- 
visors shall  submit  to  the  owners  and  tenants  of  agricultural  land  in  the  county 
at  any  general  election  or  special  election  called  for  that  purpose,  the  question 
of  wli ether  a  tax  not  to  exceed  two  cents  per  acre  shall  be  levied  annually  on 
agricultural  land.  Notice  of  the  election  shall  be  published  each  week  for  two 
c  onsecutive  weeks  in  a  newspaper  of  general  circulation  throughout  the  county- 
The  notice  shall  include  the  date  and  time  of  the  election  and  the  question  to 
be  voted  upon.  A  majority  of  the  agricultural  landowners  and  tenants  voting 
shall  determine  the  question.  (Acts  1972  (64  G.A.)  ch.  1086,  §  5.) 

361.6  Budget  request 

The  weather  modification  board  annually  submit  a  budget  request  to  the 
county  board  of  supervisors.  If  the  annual  tax  levy  is  approved  as  provided 
in  section  361.5,  the  weather  modification  board  shall  determine  the  tax  levy 
needed,  not  to  exceed  two  cents  per  acre  on  agricultural  land,  to  meet  the 
budget  request.  The  tax  shall  be  levied  by  the  board  of  supervisors  and  collected 
al  the  same  time  and  iii  the  same  manner  as  other  property  taxes.  (Acts  1972 
(64  G.A.)  ch.  1086,  §  6.) 


543 


S61.7  Cancellation  of  program 

If  a  tax  levy  has  been  authorized  under  section  361.5,  the  county  board  of 
supervisors  shall,  upon  receipt  of  a  petition  signed  by  at  least  one  hundred 
owners  and  tenants  of  agricultural  land  located  in  the  county,  submit  to  the 
owners  and  tenants  of  agricultural  land  at  any  general  election  or  special 
election  called  for  that  purpose  the  following  question:  "Shall  the  power  to 
levy  a  tax  for  the  administration  of  an  artificial  weather  modification  pro- 
gram be  canceled?"  Notice  of  the  date  and  time  of  election  and  the  question 
to  be  voted  upon  shall  be  publishd  each  week  for  two  consecutive  weeks 
in  a  newspaper  or  general  circulation  throughout  the  county.  If  a  majority 
of  the  agricultural  landowners  and  tenants  voting  favor  the  question,  no  fur- 
ther tax  levy  as  provided  in  section  361.6  shall  be  made.  (Acts  1972  (64  G.A.) 
ch.  1086,  §7.) 

Kansas 

Kan.  Stat.  §§19-212f;  82a-1401-82a-1425 

19-212f.  Establishment  or  participation  in  weather  modification  programs; 
expenditures ;  definition  of  weather  modification.  The  board  of  county  commis- 
sioners of  any  county  is  hereby  authorized  to  establish  or  participate  in  weather 
modification  programs  and  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  costs  thereof  are  hereby 
authorized  to  expend  moneys  from  the  county  general  fund,  moneys  derived 
from  taxes  levied  therefor  or  any  other  funds  of  the  county  available  for  such 
purpose  and  in  addition  to  receive  and  expend  any  and  all  funds  which  may  be 
offered  or  become  available  from  federal  or  state  grants  or  appropriations,  pri- 
vate gifts,  donations  or  bequests  or  from  any  other  source.  As  used  in  this  act 
"weather  modification"  means  and  extends  to  the  control,  alteration,  ameliora- 
tion of  weather  elements  including  man-caused  changes  in  the  natural  precip- 
itation process,  hail  suppression  or  modification  and  alteration  of  other  weather 
phenomena  including  temperature,  wind  direction  and  velocity,  and  the  initiat- 
ing, increasing,  decreasing  and  otherwise  modifying  by  artificial  methods  preci- 
pitation in  the  form  of  rain,  snow,  hail,  mist  or  fog  through  cloud  seeding, 
electrification  or  by  other  means  to  provide  immediate  practical  benefits.  [L. 
1975,  ch.  74,  §  2 ;  July  1.] 

ARTICLE  14. — KANSAS  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACT 

Cross  references  to  related  sections 

Powers  of  boards  of  county  commissioners,  see  19-212f. 
Interlocal  agreements,  see  12-2904. 

82a-llf01.  Citation  of  act.  This  act  may  be  cited  as  the  "Kansas  weather 
modification  act."  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  1 ;  July  1.] 

82a-llf02.  Kansas  weather  modification  act;  definitions.  As  used  in  this  act, 
unless  the  context  otherwise  requires:  (a)  "Board"  means  the  Kansas  water 
resources  board ; 

(b)  "Director"  means  the  executive  director  of  the  Kansas  water  resources 
board ; 

(c)  "Person"  means  and  includes  a  natural  person,  a  partnership,  an  organi- 
zation, a  corporation,  a  municipality  and  any  department  or  agency  of  the  state ; 

(d)  "Research  and  development  operation"  or  "research  and  development 
project"  means  an  operation  which  is  conducted  solely  to  advance  scientific  and 
technical  knowledge ;  and 

(e)  "Weather  modification  activity"  means  any  operation  or  experimental 
process  which  has  as  its  objective  inducing  change,  by  artificial  means,  in  the 
composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics  of  the  atmosphere.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  2 ; 
July  1.] 

82a-1403.  Same;  administration  of  act;  rules  and  regulations;  powers  of 
board  and  director.  The  board  is  hereby  vested  with  responsibility  for  the  im- 
plementation of  this  act.  Within  the  authority  granted  to  the  board,  the  di- 
rector shall  be  the  chief  administrative  officer  for  carrying  out  the  powers  and 
duties  provided  for  in  this  act.  The  board  may  adopt  rules  and  regulations,  issue 
licenses  and  permits,  conduct  hearings,  enter  into  contracts  for  weather  modifi- 
cation activities  and  to  do  all  other  things  provided  for  in  this  act  for  the 
achievement  of  its  purposes,  subject  to  the  powers  and  limitations  contained 
herein.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  3 ;  July  1.] 


544 


S2a-l>t0Jf.  Same ;  advisory  committee :  membership,  duties  and  compensatiom 
(a)  The  board  shall  appoint  an  advisory  committee  to  assist  the  director  in 
developing  licensing  standards  and  report  forms,  in  conducting  studies,  in  es- 
tablishing minimum  operation  requirements  for  weather  modification  activities, 
and  to  advise  the  board  and  the  director  on  such  other  matters,  both  technical 
and  general,  as  the  board  may  deem  appropriate. 

(&)  The  advisory  committee  shall  be  composed  of  seven  (7)  persons  desig- 
nated by  the  board  who  have  the  appropriate  scientific,  technical,  legal,  indus- 
trial, agricultural  or  water  resources  background  to  serve  in  an  advisory  ca- 
pacity relative  to  weather  modification  activities  and  may  include  such  other 
persons  from  the  public  sector  as  the  board  may  deem  capable  of  contributing 
assistance.  Four  (4)  members  of  the  advisory  committee  shall  be  actively  en- 
gaged in  agriculture  and  shall  derive  a  major  portion  of  their  income  from 
agriculture. 

(c)  Members  of  the  advisory  committee  shall  serve  without  compensation  but 
they  shall  receive  subsistence  allowances,  mileage  and  other  expenses  as  pro- 
vided in  section  1  of  1974  House  bill  No.  1624  [  75-3223],  while  attending  meet- 
ings of  such  committee,  f  L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  4  ;  July  1.] 

82a-l 405.  Same;  licenses,  issuance  and  limitations;  permits,  issuance  and  con- 
ditions; studies,  hearings  and  investigations,  research  and  development  pro- 
mams;  expenditure  of  funds;  representation  of  state  in  matters  relating  to 
weather  modification.  («)  At  the  direction  of  the  board,  the  director  may  issue 
licenses  for  weather  modification  activities,  as  hereinafter  provided  for  in  this 
act  but  any  licensee  shall  be  limited  in  the  exercise  of  activities  under  his 
license  to  the  specified  method  or  methods  of  weather  modification  activity  within 
his  area  of  expertise. 

(&)  At  the  direction  of  the  board,  the  director  may  issue  a  permit  for  each 
specific  weather  modification  project,  which  may  be  comprised  of  one  or  more 
weather  modification  activities.  Every  such  permit  shall  describe  (1)  the  geo- 
graphic area  within  which  such  activities  are  to  be  carried  out,  (2)  the  geo- 
graphic area  to  be  affected,  and  (3)  duration  of  the  weather  modification  activ- 
ities of  the  project  which  period  may  be  non-continuous  but  which  may  not 
have  a  total  duration  exceeding  one  calendar  year  from  the  day  of  its  issuance. 
The  director  shall  issue  a  permit  only  after  it  has  been  established  that  the 
project,  as  conceived,  will  provide  substantial  benefits  or  that  it  will  advance 
scientific  knowledge.  The  director  may  ask  the  advisory  committee  to  review 
each  request  for  a  i>erniit  and  to  advise  him  thereon. 

(c)  The  director  shall  make  any  studies  or  investigations,  obtain  any  infor- 
mation, and  hold  any  hearings  that  he  considers  necessary  or  proper  to  assist 
him  in  exercising  his  powers  or  administering  or  enforcing  the  provisions  of 
this  act. 

The  director  may  by  his  own  action,  or  at  the  request  of  the  advisory  com- 
mittee, appoint  a  bearing  officer  to  conduct  any  hearings  required  by  this  act; 
said  hearings  to  be  conducted  under  the  provisions  and  within  any  limitations 
of  rules  and  regulations  adopted  by  the  board. 

(d)  In  order  to  assist  in  expanding  the  theoretical  and  practical  knowledge 
of  weather  modification,  the  board  may,  to  the  extent  that  funds  are  available 
therefor,  participate  in  and  promote  research  and  development  in  : 

(1)  The  theory  and  development  of  weather  modification,  including  those 
aspects  relating  to  procedures,  materials,  ecological  effects,  and  the  attend- 
ant legal  and  social  problems; 

(2)  The  utilization  of  weather  modification  for  domestic,  municipal,  agri- 
cultural, industrial,  recreational,  and  other  beneficial  purposes  ; 

(3)  The  protection  of  life,  health,  property,  and  the  general  environment, 
(c)  Subject  to  any  limitations  imposed  by  law,  the  board  in  furthering  the 

purposes  of  this  act  may  utilize  available  funds  from  the  state  and  may  accept 
federal  grants,  private  gifts,  and  donations  from  any  source.  Except  as  other- 
wise provided  by  law.  t lie  board  may  use  any  such  moneys  : 

( 1 )  For  the  administration  of  this  act ; 

(2)  To  encourage  research  and  development  projects  by  public  or  private 
agencies  through  grants,  contracts,  or  cooperative  arrangements; 

(3)  To  contract  for  Weather  modification  activities  to  seek  relief  from 
or  to  avoid  droughts,  hail,  storms,  tires,  fog,  or  other  undesirable  conditions. 

(/)  Under  the  direction  of  the  bBard,  the  director  shall  represent  the  state  in 
matters  pertaining  to  plans,  procedures,  or  negotiations  for  cooperative  agree- 


545 


merits,  or  intergovernmental  arrangements  relating  to  weather  modification.  [L. 
1974.  ch.  321,  §  5;  July  1.] 

82a-1406.  Same;  engaging  in  weather  modification  without,  or  in  violation  of 
license  or  permit ;  exemption  from  payment  of  fees,  (a)  No  person  may  engage 
in  any  activity  for  weather  modification  or  control  without  a  weather  modifica- 
tion license  and  a  weather  modification  permit  issued  by  the  director.  No  person 
may  engage  in  any  activity  in  violation  of  any  term  or  condition  of  a  license  or 
permit  issued  under  this  act. 

(ft)  The  board,  to  the  extent  it  considers  exemptions  appropriate  and  de- 
sirable, may  exempt  the  following  weather  modification  activities  from  the  fee 
requirements  of  this  act : 

(1)  Research  and  development  operations  and  experiments  conducted 
by  or  under  authority  of  any  state  or  federal  department  or  agency,  state 
institution  of  higher  education,  or  nonprofit  research  organization  ; 

(2)  Laboratory  research  and  experiments  ;  and 

(3)  Activities  of  an  emergency  nature  for  protection  of  public  health, 
safetv,  and  welfare  including  but  not  limited  to  fire,  frost,  hail,  sleet,  smog, 
fog,  and  drought.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  6  ;  July  1.1 

82a-l-i07.  Same;  license;  application;  requirements.  The  director  shall  issue 
a  weather  modification  license  to  each  person  who:  (a)  Applies  in  writing  to 
the  board  in  such  form  as  the  board  shall  require ; 

( ft )  Pays  the  license  fee,  if  applicable  ;  and 

(c)  Meets  at  least  one  of  the  following  requirements  : 

(1)  The  applicant  shall  demonstrate  that  he  (or  his  official  representative) 
has  had  at  least  eight  years  of  professional  experience  in  weather  modifica- 
tion field  research  or  activities,  and  has  served  for  at  least  three  years  as 
a  project  director  of  weather  modification  activities  ; 

(2)  The  applicant  shall  demonstrate  that  he  has  obtained  a  bacalaureate 
degree  from  a  recognized  institution  of  higher  learning  in  engineering, 
mathematics,  or  the  physical  sciences  and  has  had  at  least  three  years  of 
experience  in  weather  modification  field  research  or  activities  ;  or 

(3)  The  applicant  shall  demonstrate  that  he  has  obtained  a  baccalaureate 
degree  from  a  recognized  institution  of  higher  learning  in  engineering, 
mathematics,  or  the  physical  sciences  and  has  satisfactorily  completed  the 
equivalent  of  at  least  twenty-five  (25)  semester  hours  of  meteorological 
studies  at  a  recognized  institution  of  higher  learning  and  has  had  at  least 
two  years  of  practical  experience  in  weather  modification  research  or  activ- 
ities; and 

(d)  Demonstrates  that  he  possesses  the  knowledge,  skill,  and  experience  neces- 
sary to  conduct  weather  modification  activities  without  unreasonable  risk  of 
injury  to  persons  or  property.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  7  ;  July  1.] 

8.2a-1408.  Same;  license  fee:  license  year;  renewal,  fee:  deposit  of  fees  in 
general  fund.  A  license  shall  be  issued  under  this  act  only  upon  payment  to  the 
board  of  a  fee  of  one  hundred  dollars  ($100).  Each  license  shall  expire  at  the 
end  of  the  calendar  year  for  which  it  is  issued. 

Subject  to  the  limitation  of  this  act,  any  person  licensed  under  the  provisions 
of  this  act  may,  on  or  before  January  1.  each  year,  renew  his  license  by  payment 
to  the  board  of  an  annual  fee  of  one  hundred  dollars  ($100).  The  board  shall 
remit  all  moneys  received  pursuant  to  this  section  to  the  state  treasurer  and 
the  state  treasurer  shall  deposit  the  same  in  the  state  treasury  to  the  credit  of 
the  state  general  fund.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  8  ;  July  1.] 

82a-lJf09.  Same  ;  license  ;  suspension  or  revocation  ;  conditions  and  procedures. 
Any  license  issued  under  this  act  may  be  suspended  or  revoked  by  the  board  after 
notice  and  hearing,  when  (1)  the  licensee  is  found  to  have  engaged  in  any  activ- 
ity prohibited  by  or  under  this  act,  (2)  he  has  practiced  fraud  or  deceit  in  ob- 
taining a  license,  (3)  he  has  been  negligent  or  guilty  of  incompetence  in  engag- 
ing in  any  weather  modification  activity,  or  (4)  he  has  violated  any  require- 
ment of  this  act.  In  addition  to  the  board,  any  interested  person  may  make  a 
formal  complaint  to  the  board  against  any  licensee.  All  formal  complaints  shall 
he  in  writing,  shall  be  signed  by  the  complainant,  and  shall  specify  the  charges 
against  the  licensee.  Upon  receipt  of  a  formal  complaint,  the  board  shall  make 
a  preliminary  examination  thereof,  and  if  it  determines  that  there  are  reasonable 
grounds  to  believe  that  the  licensee  has  committed  any  of  the  acts  for  which  his 
license  may  be  suspended  or  revoked  under  this  section,  it  shall  set  the  matter 
for  hearing,  shall  give  the  licensee  concerned  at  least  thirty  (30)  days  written 


546 


notice  prior  to  the  time  set  for  the  hearing,  and  shall  furnish  the  licensee  a  true 
and  correct  copy  of  the  complaint  at  the  time  of  such  notice.  Service  upon  such 
licensee  shall  be  deemed  to  have  been  made  when  the  notice  and  a  copy  of  the 
complaint  are  deposited  by  the  board  in  the  United  States  mail,  addressed  to 
the  licensee  at  the  last  known  address  shown  in  the  records  and  files  of  the  board. 
At  any  hearing  before  the  board,  any  party  may  appear  either  in  person  or  by 
counsel,  except  that  the  person  bringing  the  complaint  shall  have  the  burden  of 
proof.  When  authorized  by  a  majority  of  the  board,  any  member  of  the  board 
shall  have  the  authority  to  administer  oaths  to  witnesses  and  to  issue  subpoenas 
in  connection  with  any  hearing  authorized  by  this  section.  A  transcript  shall  be 
kept  of  the  hearing  before  the  board.  The  costs  of  notice  and  hearing  may  be 
borne  by  the  board  or  assessed  at  the  discretion  of  the  board.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321, 
§9;  July  1.] 

82ar-1410.  Same;  appeals  to  district  court.  Any  party  who  deems  himself 
aggrieved  by  any  decision  of  the  board  may  appeal  to  the  district  court  as 
provided  in  K.S.A.  60-2101.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  10;  July  1.] 

82a-14H.  Same ;  permit ;  application ;  requirements ;  financial  responsibility. 
(a)  The  director  shall  issue  a  weather  modification  permit  to  each  person  who: 

(1)  Applies  in  writing  to  the  director  for  a  permit  in  such  form  as  the 
director  shall  require ; 

(2)  Holds  a  valid  weather  modification  license  issued  under  this  act;. 

(3)  Pays  the  permit  fee,  if  applicable ; 

(4)  Files  with  the  director  proof  of  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for 
liability  on  account  of  accidents  arising  out  of  any  weather  modification 
activities  to  be  conducted  by  him  in  an  amount  of  not  less  than  fifty  thousand 
dollars  ($50,000)  because  of  bodily  injury  to  or  death  of  one  person  resulting 
from  any  one  accident  and,  subject  to  said  limit  for  one  person,  in  an  amount 
of  not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  ($100,000)  because  of  bodily 
injury  to  or  death  of  two  or  more  persons  resulting  from  any  one  ac- 
cident, and  in  an  amount  of  not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  dollars 
($100,000)  because  of  injury  to  or  destruction  of  the  property  of  others 
resulting  from  any  one  accident,  or  in  such  increased  amounts  as  the 
board  may  require  hereunder  upon  determining  that  the  circumstances  of 
the  particular  weather  modification  project  require  additional  proof  of 
financial  responsibility,  except  that  municipalities  and  departments  or 
agencies  of  the  state  shall  be  exempt  from  the  requirements  of  this  para- 
graph ;  proof  of  financial  responsibility  required  hereunder  may  be  given 
by  a  certificate  of  insurance  or  a  bond  or  a  certificate  of  deposit  of 
money ; 

(5)  Submits  a  complete  and  satisfactory  operational  plan  for  the  pro- 
posed weather  modification  project  which  includes  a  map  of  the  proposed 
operating  area  which  specifies  the  primary  target  area  and  shows  the 
area  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected,  the  name  and  address  of  the 
licensee,  the  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities, the  person  or  organization  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted, 
a  statement  showing  any  expected  effect  upon  the  environment,  the  methods 
that  will  be  used  in  determining  and  evaluating  the  proposed  weather 
modification  project,  and  such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the 
director ; 

(6)  Meets  the  preceding  requirements  for  a  permit  and  before  begin- 
ning operations  under  the  proposed  weather  modification  project  publishes 
a  notice  of  intent  to  engage  in  weather  modification  activities  in  a  news- 
paper of  general  circulation  in  the  county  or  counties  to  be  affected  by 
the  proposed  project.  The  published  notice  shall  designate  the  primary 
target  area  and  indicate  the  general  area  which  might  be  affected.  It 
shall  also  indicate  the  expected  duration  and  intended  effect  and  state  that 
complete  details  are  available  on  request  from  the  licensee  or  the  director. 
In  accordance  with  information  furnished  by  the  director,  the  notice 
shall  also  specify  a  time  and  place  for  a  hearing  on  the  proposed  weather 
modification  project,  which  will  be  conducted  by  the  board:  and 

(7)  Furnishes  to  the  director  proof  of  the  publication  of  the  notice  re- 
quired by  the  foregoing  provision. 

(h)  Before  :t  permit  is  issued,  the  director,  or  a  hearing  officer  appointed  by 
him.  shall  hold  the  public  hearing  on  the  proposed  weather  modification  project 
in  a  place  or  places  within  a  reasonable  proximity  of  the  area  expected  to  be 
:i ff eft e  1  by  the  proposed  weather  modification  activities. 


547 


(c)  No  permit  may  be  issued  unless  the  director  determines,  based  on  the 
information  provided  in  the  operational  plan  for  the  proposed  weather  modifica- 
tion project  and  on  the  testimony  and  information  provided  at  the  public 
hearing,  that : 

(1)  If  the  project  is  one  for  profit,  the  proposed  weather  modification 
activities  are  designed  to  provide,  and  are  reasonably  expected  to  provide,, 
an  economic  benefit  to  the  people  of  the  area  in  which  the  operation 
will  be  conducted,  or  will  benefit  the  people  of  the  state  of  Kansas,  and 
is  scientifically  and  technically  feasible ; 

(2)  If  the  project  is  a  scientific  or  research  project,  the  proposed  weather 
modification  activities  offer  promise  of  expanding  the  knowledge  and  the 
technology  of  weather  modification ; 

(3)  The  project  includes  adequate  safeguards  for  the  protection  of  proper- 
ty, health,  safety  and  welfare ;  and 

(4)  The  project  is  designed  to  minimize  risk  and  maximize  scientific 
gains  or  economic  benefits  to  the  people  of  the  state. 

(d)  The  operational  plan  for  the  proposed  project  shall  be  placed  on  file  with 
the  director  and  will  be  available  for  public  inspection  during  regular  office 
hours.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  11 ;  July  1.] 

82a-1412.  Same;  conduct  of  operations  under  permit  under  supervision  of 
licensee.  Operations  under  weather  modification  permits  may  be  executed  only 
by  or  under  the  immediate  direction  and  supervision  of  a  licensee  or  licensees. 
[L.  1974,  ch.  321  §  12  ;  July  1.] 

82a-1413.  Same;  permit  fees,  renewal;  deposit  in  general  fund.  The  fee  for 
each  weather  modification  permit  under  this  act  or  any  renewal  thereof  shall 
be  one  hundred  dollars  ($100)  and  shall  be  paid  to  the  board  which  shall  remit 
all  such  moneys  to  the  state  treasurer  and  the  state  treasurer  shall  deposit 
the  same  in  the  state  treasury  to  the  credit  of  the  state  general  fund.  [L.  1974, 
ch.321,  §  13;  July  1.] 

82a-1414.  Same ;  permit  for  calendar  year  :  emergency,  (a)  A  separate  weather, 
modification  permit  shall  be  required  annually  on  a  calendar  year  basis  for  each 
weather  modification  project. 

(6)  The  director  may  grant  a  weather  modification  permit  on  an  emergency 
basis  without  prior  publication  of  any  required  notice  in  instances,  of  fire,  frost, 
hail,  sleet,  smog,  fog  drought,  or  other  emergency.  In  such  situations,  publica- 
tion of  notice  shall  be  made  as  soon  as  possible  but  shall  not  be  subject  to  the 
time  limits  specified  elsewhere  in  this  act.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  14 ;  July  1.] 

82a-14l5.  Same;  permit;  revision,  suspension  or  modification  of  terms  and 
conditions  ;  procedure ;  licensee  to  notify  director  of  emergencies.  ( a )  The  direc- 
tor may  revise,  suspend,  or  modify  the  terms  and  conditions  of  a  permit  if : 

(1)  He  first  notifies  the  licensee  and  affords  the  licensee  a  reasonable 
opportunity  for  a  hearing  on  the  need  for  a  revision,  suspension,  or  modifica- 
tion and,  after  such  hearing,  he  finds  that  revision,  suspension,  or  modifica- 
tion is  necessary  to  protect  the  health,  safety,  or  property  of  any  person  or 
to  protect  the  environment ;  or 

(2)  He  finds  that  an  emergency  situation  exists,  or  is  impending,  which 
would  endanger  life,  property,  or  the  environment,  in  which  case  he  may, 
on  his  own  initiative,  without  giving  prior  notice  or  conducting  a  hearing, 
immediately  modify  the  conditions  of  a  permit,  or  order  the  temporary  sus- 
pension of  the  permit. 

(6)  Upon  ordering  revision,  suspension  or  modification  under  paragraph  (2) 
of  subsection  (a)  of  this  section,  the  director  shall  within  ten  (10)  days  there- 
after hold  a  hearing  on  the  question  of  permanently  revising,  suspending,  or 
modifying  the  terms  and  conditions  of  the  permit  and  shall  notify  the  licensee 
at  the  time  of  ordering  the  revision,  suspension,  or  modification  of  the  time 
and  place  that  he  will  hear  the  matter.  A  licensee's  failure  to  comply  with  an 
order  of  the  director  to  temporarily  suspend  or  change  the  authorized  activity 
shall  be  grounds  for  immediate  revocation  of  the  permit  and  of  the  operator's 
license. 

(c)  It  shall  be  the  responsibility  of  the  licensee  conducting  anv  weather 
modification  activity  to  notify  the  director  of  any  emergency  that  the  licensee 
could  be  expected  to  reasonably  foresee,  including  any  existing  emergency  sit- 
uations described  in  paragraph  (2)  of  subsection  (a)  of  this  section  that,  might 
in  any  way  be  caused  or  affected  by  weather  modification  activities.  Failure  by 
the  licensee  to  so  notify  the  director  of  any  such  existing  emergnecy,  or  any 


548 


impending  emergency  that  the  licensee  should  have  reasonably  foreseen,  may 
be  grounds  for  revocation  of  the  permit  and  the  operator's  license.  [L.  1974,  ch. 
321.  §15;  July  1.] 

82a-1416.  Same ;  licensee  confined  to  terms  and  conditions  of  permit.  When  a 
weather  modification  permit  has  been  issued,  the  licensee  shall  confine  his 
weather  modification  activities  within  the  limits  of  time  and  area  specified  in 
the  permit,  except  to  the  extent  that  the  limits  are  modified  by  the  director. 
He  shall  also  comply  with  any  terms  and  conditions  of  the  permit  as  originally 
issued  or  as  subsequently  revised  or  modified  by  the  director.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321, 
§16;  July  1.] 

82d'-1417.  Same;  reports  of  activities;  form  and  content,  (a)  Any  person  con- 
ducting weather  modification  activities  in  Kansas  or  operations  that  affect  con- 
ditions within  Kansas  shall  file  reports  at  such  time  or  times  and  in  the  manner 
and  form  as  the  board  may  require. 

(6)  The  director  shall  develop  report  forms  that  shall  provide  for  reporting 
the  methods  employed,  the  type  of  equipment  used,  the  kind  and  amount  of 
each  material  used,  the  times  and  places  the  equipment  was  operated,  the  name 
and  address  of  each  individual  other  than  the  licensee  who  participated  or 
assisted  in  the  activities,  any  environmental  effects  that  have  or  are  believed 
to  have  occurred,  and  any  other  data  as  the  board  may  require.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321, 
§  17;  July  1.] 

82a-l/fl8.  Same ;  suspension  or  revocation  of  permit ;  refusal  to  renew  license 
or  issue  additional  permit,  (a)  The  director  shall  suspend  or  revoke  a  permit 
if  he  finds  that  the  licensee  no  longer  meets  the  quaifications  or  conditions  of  the 
original  permit  or  has  violated  any  provision  of  this  act. 

(&)  At  the  direction  of  the  board,  the  director  may  refuse  to  renew  the  license 
of.  or  to  issue  another  permit  to,  any  applicant  who  has  failed  to  comply  with 
any  provision  of  this  act.  [L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  18 ;  July  1.] 

82dr-llfl9.  Same :  suspension  or  revocation  of  license  or  permit ;  notice  of  hear- 
ing, (a)  Except  as  provided  in  section  15  [82a-1415]  of  this  act  relating  to  the 
director,  the  board  or  the  director  shall  not  suspend  or  revoke  a  license  or  per- 
mit without  first  giving  the  licensee  reasonable  notice  and  a  reasonable  oppor- 
tunity to  be  heard  with  respect  to  the  ground  for  possible  suspension  or 
revocation. 

(b)  Hearings  under  this  section  shall  be  conducted  by  the  board  or  the 
director  in  the  manner  provided  for  in  section  9  [82a-1409]  of  this  act.  [L.  1974, 
ch.  321,  §  19;  July  1.] 

82a^l420.  Same :  state  and  local  officers  immune  from  liability ;  issuance  of 
permit  not  state  endorsement.  Officers  and  employees  of  the  state  or  any  depart- 
ment or  agency  thereof,  and  officers  and  employees  of  any  county  or  municipality 
or  other  public  agency  of  the  state,  shall  be  immune  from  liability  resulting 
from  any  weather  modification  activity  approved  or  conducted  by  them  or  under 
their  authority  under  the  provisions  and  limitations  of  this  act.  The  issuance 
of  a  permit  to  conduct  weather  modification  activities  does  not  constitute  state 
endorsement  of  any  weather  modification  activities  conducted  with  respect  to 
that  permit.  [L.  1974.  ch.  321.  §  20  ;  July  1.] 

x2a-1Jf2l.  Same:  operation  without  license  or  permit;  order  to  cease;  enforce- 
ment. The  director  may  order  any  person  who  is  found  to  be  conducting  weather 
modification  activity  without  a  license  and  permit  to  cease  and  desist  from  said 
operation.  Anv  such  order  shall  be  enforceable  in  any  court  of  competent  juris- 
diction. |"L.  1974.  ch.  321,  §  21 ;  July  1.] 

82a-li22.  Same;  license  or  permit  no  defense  in  action  for  damages  or  in- 
junctive relief.  The  fact  that  a  person  holds  a  license  or  a  permit  under  this  act, 
or  that  he  has  complied  with  all  requirements  established  pursuant  to  this  act, 
shall  not  be  a  defense  in  actions  for  damages  or  injunctive  relief  brought  against 
him.  IX.  1974.  eli.  321.  §  22 ;  July  1.] 

S2a-1423.  Same  violations  of  act,  misdemeanor.  Any  person  conducting  a 
weather  modification  activity  without  first  having  procured  a  required  license 
and  permit,  or  who  shall  knowingly  make  a  false  statement  in  an  application 
for  a  license  or  permit,  or  who  shall  fail  to  file  any  report  or  reports  as  required  by 
This  act.  or  who  shall  conduct  any  weather  modification  activity  after  a  revocation 
of  his  license  or  the  denial,  revocation,  modification,  or  temporary  suspension  of 
his  weather  modification  permit  therefor,  or  who  shall  violate  any  other  provi- 
sions of  this  act.  shall  be  guilty  of  a  class  B  misdemeanor.  Each  day  that  any 
such  unauthorized  weather  modification  activity  is  conducted  shall  constitute 
a  separate  offense.  [  L.  1974,  ch.  321,  §  23  ;  July  1.] 


549 


S2(i-142Jf.  Severability  of  act.  If  any  word,  phrase,  sentence,  or  provision  of 
this  act  is  determined  to  be  invalid,  such  invalidity  shall  not  affect  the  other 
provisions  of  this  act  and  they  shall  be  given  effect  without  the  invalid  provi- 
sion, and  to  this  end  the  provisions  of  this  act  are  declared  to  be  severable.  [L. 
1974,  ch.  321,  §  24;  July  1.] 

82a-lJf25.  Participation  by  counties  in  weather  modification  programs ;  tax 
levy :  procedure ;  protest  petitions.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  of  any 
county  is  hereby  authorized  to  establish  or  participate  in  weather  modification 
programs  and  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  costs  thereof  is  authorized  to  levy 
a  tax  of  not  to  exceed  two  (2)  mills  upon  the  assessed  tangible  valuation  of  prop- 
erly in  the  county  and  to  expend  such  moneys  for  weather  modification  purposes  : 
Provided,  In  counties  of  this  state  having  a  population  of  more  than  one  hundred 
eighty  thousand  (180,000)  and  not  more  than  two  hundred  twenty  thousand 
(220.000)  and  an  assessed  tangible  valuation  of  more  than  three  hundred  fifty 
million  (350,000,000)  and  not  more  than  three  hundred  sixty-five  million 
(365.000,000)  shall  be  excluded.  No  such  levy  shall  be  made  until  a  resolution 
authorizing  the  same  shall  be  adopted  by  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
stating  the  specific  purpose  for  which  such  levy  is  made,  the  amount  of  the 
proposed  levy  and  the  number  of  years  such  tax  levy  shall  be  made  and  until 
such  resolution  has  been  published  once  each  week  for  three  (3)  consecutive 
weeks  in  the  official  county  newspaper.  Whereupon  any  such  levy  may  be  made 
unless  a  petition  requesting  an  election  upon  the  proposition  signed  by  electors 
equal  in  number  to  not  less  than  five  percent  (5%)  of  the  qualified  electors  of 
such  county  is  filed  in  the  office  of  the  county  election  officer  within  sixty  (60) 
days  following  the  last  publication  of  such  resolution.  In  the  event  any  such  peti- 
tion is  filed,  no  levy  shall  be  made  without  the  same  having  been  approved  by  a 
majority  of  the  electors  of  such  county  voting  at  an  election  called  and  held 
thereon  within  ninety  (90)  days  after  the  last  publication  of  such  resolution 
or  at  the  next  general  election  if  held  within  such  time.  Such  election  shall  be 
noticed,  called  and  held  in  the  manner  provided  for  by  the  provisions  of  K.  S.  A. 
1976  Supp.  10-120.  Such  tax  levy  shall  be  in  addition  to  all  other  tax  levies 
authorized  or  limited  by  law  and  shall  not  be  subject  to  nor  within  the  limita- 
tions upon  the  levy  of  taxes  imposed  by  K.  S.  A.  1976  Supp.  79-5001  to  79-5016, 
inclusive,  and  amendments  thereto. 

The  board  of  county  commissioners  is  authorized  to  expend  any  other  funds 
of  the  county  available  for  any  such  purpose  and,  in  addition,  to  receive  and 
expend  any  and  all  funds  which  may  be  offered  or  become  available  for  am 
such  purpose.  [L.  1976,  ch.  114,  §  1 :  July  1.] 

Louisiana 

La.  Rev.  Stat.  Ann.  §§  2201-2208 

Chapter  25.  Weather  Modification 

Sec. 

2201.  Sovereign  right  to  use  of  moisture. 

2202.  Definitions. 

2203.  Necessity  for  license  :  application. 

2204.  Licenses  :  fees  :  expiration  ;  revocation. 

2205.  Disposition  of  fees. 

2206.  Penalty. 

2207.  Qualifications  and  requirements  :  conditions. 

2208.  Evaluation  of  operations  ;  reports. 

§  2201.  Sovereign  right  to  use  of  moisture 

It  is  hereby  declared  that  the  state  of  Louisiana  claims  its  sovereign  right 
to  the  use  for  the  best  interest  of  its  people  of  the  moisture  contained  in  the 
clouds  and  atmosphere  within  its  state  boundaries.  (Acts  1956,  Xo.  350.  §  1.) 

§  2202.  Definitions 

The  term  "weather  modification",  as  used  in  this  Chapter,  means  the  chanaing 
or  controlling  by  chemical,  mechanical,  or  physical  methods  the  occurrence  of 
lightning  or  the  precipitation  of  rain,  hail.  mist,  sleet,  or  snow. 

The  term  "Commissioner",  as  used  in  this  chapter,  means  the  commissioner  of 
the  Louisiana  State  Department  of  Agriculture  and  Immigration.  (Acts  1956,  Xo. 
350,  §§  2.  3.) 

§  2203.  Xeeessity  for  lieense;  applieation 

Any  person  who  engages  in  weather  modification  shall  prior  to  engaging  in 
such  activity  obtain  a  license  from  commissioner  in  accordance  with  the  pro- 


550 


cedure  established  the  commissioner.  Each  application  for  a  license  shall  be 
accompanied  by  a  fee  of  twenty-five  dollars.  (Acts  1956,  No.  350,  §  4.) 

§  220 If.  Licenses;  fees;  expiration;  revocation 

A  license  fee  of  one  hundred  dollars  shall  be  paid  by  any  person  issued  a 
weather  modification  license,  in  addition  to  the  application  fee  provided  in  R.S. 
37  :2203.  Each  such  license  shall  expire  one  year  after  the  date  such  license  is 
issued  and  shall  be  revocable  at  any  time,  by  the  Commissioner,  in  accordance 
with  such  procedure  as  the  commissioner  may  establish.  (Acts  1956,  No.  350,  §  5.) 

§  2205.  Disposition  of  fees 

The  money  collected  from  fees  provided  in  R.S.  37:2203  and  R.S.  37:2204 
shall  be  deposited  with  the  state  treasurer  to  be  credited  to  the  general  fund  of 
the  state  of  Louisiana.  (Acts  1956,  No.  350,  §  6.) 

§  2206.  Penalty 

Any  person  engaging  in  weather  modification  without  a  license  shall  be  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor  and  shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  five  hundred  dollars  for  each 
separate  offense.  (Acts  1956,  No.  350,  §  7.) 

§  2207.  Qualifications  and  requirements;  conditions 

The  commissioner  shall  determine  the  qualifications  and  requirements  which 
applicants  must  meet  in  order  to  receive  a  license  to  engage  in  weather  modifica- 
tion and  shall  establish  the  conditions  under  which  weather  modification  opera- 
tions may  be  carried  out.  (Acts  1956,  No.  350,  §  8.) 

§  2208.  Evaluation  of  operations ;  reports 

The  commissioner  shall  evaluate  each  weather  modification  operation  and 
publish  the  results  of  such  evaluation  in  an  annual  report.  (Acts  1956,  No.  350, 
§9.) 

Minnesota 

Minn.  Stat.  Ann.  §§  42.01-42.14 

1977  Session — Weathek  Modification 

CHAPTER  4  26 

S.  F.  No.  73  [Coded] 

An  ACT  relating  to  weather  modification;  prescribing  powers  and  duties  for  the  commis- 
sioner of  agriculture  ;  providing  for  weather  modification  research  ;  requiring  the  ob- 
taining of  licenses  and  permits  prior  to  engaging  in  weather  modification  ;  prohibiting 
the  use  of  cloud  seeding  apparatus  located  on  the  ground;  prescribing  penalties;  ap- 
propriating money 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Minnesota: 

SECTION  1 

42.01  Policy 

The  legislature  finds  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  state  to  regulate  weather 
modification  to  protect  its  citizens,  but  nothing  in  sections  42.01  to  42.14  shall 
be  construed  to  encourage  or  promote  weather  modification. 

SECTION  2 

42.02  Definitions 

Subdivision  1.  For  the  purposes  of  sections  42.01  to  42.14,  the  terms  defined 
in  this  section  have  the  meanings  given  them. 

Subdivision  2.  "Weather  modification"  means  any  activity  performed  in  con- 
nection with  placing  or  attempting  to  place  any  substance  in  the  atmosphere  or 
clouds  within  the  atmosphere,  including  fog,  with  the  intention  of  and  for  the 
purpose  of  producing  artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  motions,  and  result- 
ing behavior  of  the  atmosphere  or  clouds  within  the  atmosphere,  including  fog. 

Subdivision  3.  "Person"  means  any  person,  firm,  association,  organization,  part- 
nership,  company,  corporation,  private  or  public,  county,  city,  trust  or  other  pub- 
lic agency. 

Subdivision  4.  "Operation"  moans  the  performance  of  weather  modification 
activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to  produce,  a 
certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one  continuing  time 
interval  not  exceeding  one  year. 

Subdivision  5.  '^Commissioner"  means  the  commissioner  of  agriculture. 


551 


SECTION  3 

42.03  Sovereign  right  claimed  by  state 

It  is  declared  that  the  state  of  Minnesota  claims  its  sovereign  right  to  use 
for  the  best  interest  of  its  residents  the  moisture  contained  in  the  clouds  and 
atmosphere  within  its  sovereign  state  boundaries. 

section  4 

42.04  Commissioner;  powers  and  duties 

Subdivision  1.  Powers.  The  commissioner  of  agriculture  may  : 

(a)  pursuant  to  Minnesota  Statutes,  Chapter  15,  adopt  rules  necessary  to 
implement  the  license  and  permit  program  established  pursuant  to  sections 
42.01  to  42.14 ; 

(b)  enter  into  contracts  or  memoranda  of  agreement  and  do  all  things 
necessary  to  cooperate  with  the  United  States  government,  and  to  qualify 
for,  accept  and  disburse  any  private  grant  intended  for  the  administration 
of  sections  42.01  to  42.14 ; 

(c)  cooperate  with  other  states  to  jointly  carry  out  research  and  planning 
in  weather  modification ; 

(d)  advise  persons,  groups,  and  local  units  of  government  on  weather  modi- 
fication and  distribute  informational  material  relating  to  weather  modifica- 
tion and  review  and  comment  on  all  county  programs  of  weather  modifica- 
tion ;  and 

(e)  carry  on  research  related  to  weather  modification  including  evaluation 
of  the  effects  of  weather  modification  activities  within  the  state  by  staff  mem- 
bers, or  by  contract.  Evaluation  of  weather  modification  programs  shall, 
if  practical  and  within  limits  of  available  funding,  including  components  of 
economic  and  environmental  analysis  which  delineate  the  economic  and  en- 
vironmental implications  of  the  programs. 

Subdivision  2.  Duties.  The  commissioner  of  agriculture  shall : 

(a)  utilize  to  the  extent  possible  the  facilities  and  technical  resources  of 
public  and  private  institutions  in  the  state  ; 

(b)  by  rule  adopted  pursuant  to  Minnesota  Statutes,  Chapter  15,  require 
persons  engaged  in  weather  modification  to  submit  reports  of  their  activities 
and  operations  and  any  other  information  deemed  necessary  ; 

(c)  on  or  before  January  15  of  each  year,  submit  a  report  to  the  legislature 
and  governor  describing  the  weather  modification  operations  within  the  state 
during  the  preceding  year  and  the  social,  economic  and  environmental  impact 
of  the  operations.  The  report  shall  also  include  recommendations  for  legis- 
lative action  and  any  other  information  useful  to  the  legislature. 

SECTION  5 

42.05  County  programs  of  weather  modifications 

Counties  may,  only  after  approval  of  the  commissioner  and  subject  to  the 
requirements  of  sections  42.01  to  42.14,  conduct  programs  of  weather  modifica- 
tion and  expend  money  therefor.  At  least  two  weeks  published  notice  in  a 
newspaper  of  general  circulation  within  the  county  must  be  given  before  the 
program  of  weather  modification  may  begin.  If,  within  30  days  of  a  decision 
by  a  county  to  expend  funds  for  weather  modification,  a  petition  signed  by 
voters  in  the  county  equal  in  number  to  ten  percent  of  the  votes  cast  in  the 
county  in  the  last  general  election  or  2,000  voters,  whichever  is  less,  request- 
ing a  referendum  on  the  proposed  expenditure  is  filed  with  the  county  auditor, 
the  funds  shall  not  be  expended  until  it  has  been  submitted  to  the  voters  at  a 
general  or  special  election  and  a  majority  of  votes  cast  on  the  question  of  the 
expenditure  of  the  funds  are  affirmative.  No  program  may  be  conducted 
within  the  county  without  prior  approval  by  the  county  board. 

SECTION  6 

42. 06  Licenses 

Subdivision  1.  No  person  shall  engage  in  weather  modification  without  a 
license  issued  by  the  commissioner.  Applications  for  weather  modification 
licenses  shall  be  on  forms  prescribed  and  furnished  by  the  commissioner.  The 
applicant  shall  pay  a  fee  of  $100.  The  license  shall  be  valid  for  one  year. 


552 


The  commissioner  may  waive  the  license  fee  in  situations  he  deems  appro- 
priate. 

Subdivision  2.  The  commissioner  shall  issue  licenses  only  to  applicants  who 
demonstrate  good  character,  adequate  education  and  sufficient  competence  in  the 
field  of  meteorology  and  cloud  physics  to  engage  in  weather  modification.  At 
a  minimum,  each  applicant  shall  meet  at  least  one  of  the  following: 

(1)  demonstrate  that  he  has  at  least  eight  years  of  experience  at  the  pro- 
fessional level  in  weather  modification  field  research  or  operations,  at  least 
three  of  these  years  as  a  professional  director  ;  or 

(2)  has  obtained  a  baccalaureate  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics,  or 
the  physical  sciences  plus  three  years  experience  in  weather  modification  field 
research  or  operations  ;  or 

(3)  has  obtained  a  baccalaureate  degree  in  meteorology,  or  a  degree  in  en- 
gineering or  the  physical  sciences  which  includes,  or  is  in  addition  to.  the 
equivalent  of  at  least  25  semester  hours  of  meteorological  course  work  and 
two  years  practical  experience  in  weather  modification  operations  or  re- 
search. 

If  the  applicant  is  an  organization,  the  competence  must  be  demonstrated 
by  the  individuals  who  are  to  supervise  and  conduct  the  weather  modification 

Subdivision  3.  The  commissioner  may  renew  a  license  annually  if  the  applicant 
by  the  individuals  who  are  to  supervise  and  conduct  the  weather  modification, 
fee  of  $100. 

Subdivision  4.  The  moneys  collected  as  fees  shall  be  deposited  with  the  state 
treasurer  in  the  general  fund. 

SECTION  7 

42.07  Suspension ;  revocation ;  refusal  to  renew  license 

The  commissioner  shall,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  chapter  15,  suspend, 
revoke  or  refuse  to  renew  a  license  for  any  one  or  any  combination  of  the 
following  causes : 

( 1 )  Incompetency  ; 

(2)  Dishonest  practice  : 

(3)  False  or  fraudulent  representation  in  obtaining  a  license  or  permit  un- 
der sections  42.01  to  42.14  or  rules  promulgated  thereunder  : 

(4)  Failure  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  sections  42.01  to  42.14 
or  of  rules  promulgated  thereunder  :  or 

(5)  Aiding  other  persons  who  fail  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of 
sections  42.01  to  42.14  or  rules  promulgated  thereunder. 

SECTION  8 

Jf2.08  Investigation 

The  commissioner  may  investigate  any  operation  or  research  and  develop- 
ment activities  of  any  person  applying  for  a  license  and  of  any  person  holding 
or  claiming  to  hold  a  license  or  permit. 

SECTION  9 

J/2.09  Permits 

Subdivision  1.  No  person  shall  conduct  an  operation  without  a  permit  is- 
sued by  the  commissioner.  Applications  for  permits  shall  be  on  forms  pre- 
scribed and  furnished  by  tin1  commissioner.  Permits  shall  be  issued  only  to 
applicants  who  hold  a  valid  weather  modification  license,  pay  a  fee  of  $100 
and  furnish  proof  of  financial  responsibility  pursuant  to  subdivision  2.  Prior 
to  conducting  an  operation,  the  permittee  shall  publish  notice  of  the  operation 
as  the  commissioner  shall  require  and  shall  give  written  notice  to  the  county 
boards  of  the  counties  over  which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  coun- 
ties contiguous  thereto.  The  permit  shall  be  valid  for  one  year  or  until  the 
operation  terminates,  whichever  first  occurs. 

Subdivision  2.  The  applicant  shall  demonstrate  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  com- 
missioner that  he  has  the  ability  to  respond  to  damages  for  liability  which 
might  reasonably  result  from  the  operation  for  which  the  permit  is  sought. 

Subdivision  3.  The  fees  collected  for  permits  shall  be  deposited  with  the  state 
treasurer  in  the  general  fund. 

Subdivision  4.  To  the  extent  the  commissioner  deems  necessary,  emergency 
weather  modification  operations  for  the  purpose  of  controlling  fire,  frost, 
sleet,  hail.  fog.  or  wind  shall  be  exempt  from  the  permit  requirements. 


553 


Subdivision  5.  The  commissioner  may  renew  a  permit  annually  if  the  applicant 
has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  issuance  of  an  original  permit  and  pays 
a  fee  of  $100. 

Subdivision  6.  No  permit  shall  be  issued  to  use  a  cloud  seeding  apparatus  which 
emits  cloud  seeding  material  into  the  air  when  located  on  or  in  contact  with 
the  ground. 

Subdivision  7.  Before  a  permit  is  issued,  the  commissioner  may  hold  an  informal 
hearing  on  the  permit,  at  a  location  within  the  same  geographic  area  as  the 
proposed  operation  will  be  conducted. 

Subdivision  8.  No  more  than  one  weather  modification  permit  shall  be  issued 
for  a  given  geographic  area. 

Subdivision  9.  The  applicant  must  submit  a  complete  operational  plan  for  each 
proposed  project  prepared  by  the  licensee  who  shall  conduct  the  operation, 
which  shall  include,  but  not  be  limited  to  : 

(a)  a  specific  statement  of  the  nature  and  objectives  of  the  intended  opera- 
tion, 

(b)  a  map  of  the  proposed  operating  area  which  specifies  the  primary  target 
area  and  shows  the  area  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected  and  a  raingauge 
system  for  both  seeded  and  downwind  areas, 

(c)  an  estimate  of  the  amount  of  cloud  seeding  material  expected  to  be 
placed  in  the  clouds, 

(d)  a  statement  of  the  types  of  clouds  to  be  seeded  and  identification  of 
a  procedure  for  random  selection  of  at  least  a  portion  of  the  clouds  to  be 
seeded  during  the  operation, 

(f )  the  name  and  address  of  the  licensee, 

(g)  the  person  or  organization  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted, 

(h)  a  statement  showing  any  expected  effect  upon  the  environment  and 
results  of  weather  modification  operations,  and  methods  of  determining  and 
properly  evaluating  that  operation,  and  any  other  detailed  information  as 
may  be  required  to  describe  the  operation  and  its  proposed  method  of  evalua- 
tion. 

SECTIOX  10 

-42.10  Suspension;  revocation  and  refusal  to  renew  permit 

Subdivision  1.  The  commissioner  shall,  subject  to  chapter  15,  suspend  or 
revoke  a  permit  if  it  appears  that  the  permittee  no  longer  has  the  qualifica- 
tions necessary  for  the  issuance  of  an  original  permit  or  has  violated  any 
provision  of  sections  42.01  to  42.14  or  of  any  rules  promulgated  thereunder. 

Subdivision  2.  The  commissioner  shall,  subject  to  chapter  15,  refuse  to  renew 
a  permit  if  it  appears  from  the  operational  records  and  reports  of  the  permit- 
tee that  an  original  permit  would  not  be  issuable  for  the  operation,  or  if  the 
permittee  has  violated  any  provision  of  sections  42.01  to  42.14  or  of  any  rules 
promulgated  thereunder. 

SECTIOX  11 

42.11  Modification  of  permit 

Subdivision  1.  The  commissioner  may  revise  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a 
permit  if : 

(a)  The  permittee  is  given  notice  and  a  hearing,  pursuant  to  chapter  15,  on 
whether  there  is  a  need  for  the  revision  and  the  commissioner  finds  that  a 
modification  of  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit  is  necessary  to  protect 
the  public  health,  safety  or  welfare,  or  the  environment. 

(b)  If  it  appears  to  the  commissioner  that  an  emergency  situation  exists  or 
is  impending  which  could  endanger  the  public  safety,  health  or  welfare,  or 
the  environment,  the  commissioner  may,  without  prior  notice  or  a  hearing, 
immediately  modify  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit,  or  order  temporary 
suspension  of  the  permit.  The  order  shall  include  notice  of  a  hearing  to  be 
held  pursuant  to  chapter  15  within  ten  days  thereafter  on  the  question  of  per- 
manently modifying  the  conditions  and  limits,  continuing  the  suspension  of 
the  permit,  removing  the  changes  or  lifting  the  suspension. 

Subdivision  2.  Failure  to  comply  with  an  order  temporarily  suspending  an  op- 
eration or  modifying  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit  shall  be  grounds  for 
immediate  revocation  of  the  permit  and  of  the  license  of  the  person  control- 
ling the  operation. 

Subdivision  3.  The  permittee  shall  notify  the  commissioner  of  any  emergency 
which  can  reasonably  be  foreseen,  or  of  any  existing  emergency  situations 


554 


which  might  be  caused  or  affected  by  the  operation.  Failure  by  the  permittee- 
to  so  notify  the  commissioner  may  be  grounds,  at  the  discretion  of  the  com- 
missioner, for  revocation  of  the  permit  and  of  the  license  of  the  person  con- 
trolling the  operation. 

SECTION  12 

42.12  Penalty  for  violations 

Any  person  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  sections  42.01  to  42.14  or  of 
any  rule  promulgated  thereunder  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  each  day 
such  violation  continues  constitutes  a  separate  offense. 

SECTION  13 

42.13  Legal  action 

Other  than  in  legal  actions  charging  failure  to  obtain  a  license  and  permit, 
the  fact  that  a  person  holds  a  license  or  was  issued  a  permit  under  sections 
42.01  to  42.14,  or  that  a  person  has  complied  with  the  rules  made  by  the  com- 
missioner pursuant  to  sections  42.01  to  42.14,  is  not  admissible  as  a  defense  in 
any  legal  action  which  may  be  brought  under  this  section  against  such  person. 

SECTION  14 

42.14  Injunction 

The  commissioner  may,  in  addition  to  the  other  remedies  provided  in  sections 
42.01  to  42.14  apply  to  a  district  court  having  venue  and  jurisdiction,  for  an 
injunction  to  restrain  repetitious  violations  of  the  provisions  of  sections  42.01 
to  42.14  and  of  any  rule  promulgated  thereunder. 

SECTION  15.  APPROPRIATION 

There  is  appropriated  from  the  general  fund  to  the  commissioner  the  sum 
of  $75,000  for  the  biennium  ending  June  30,  1979  for  administrative  expenses 
incurred  in  fulfiling  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

SECTION   16.  EFFECTIVE  DATE 

Section  5  of  this  act  is  effective  on  the  day  following  its  final  enactment.  Sec- 
tions 1  to  4  and  sections  6  to  16  are  effective  January  1, 1978. 
Approved  June  2, 1977. 

Montana 

Mont.  Rev.  Code  Ann.  §§  89-310-89-331 

Chapter  3 — Weather  Modification  Activities 

Sec. 

89-310.  Definitions. 

89-312.  Acquisition  of  property — acceptance  and  expenditure  of  funds — research  and  de- 
velopment authority. 
89-312.1.  Standards  for  research  in  weather  modification  control. 
89-313.  License  and  permit  required  for  weather  modification  and  control. 
89-314.  Department  to  review  applications — exemptions. 
89-315.  Issuance  of  license — qualifications  of  licensees. 
89—316.  Term  of  license — renewal. 
89-317.  License  fee. 

89-318.  Issuance  of  permits — requirements  for  permit — hearing. 
89—319.  Separate  permit  for  each  operation. 

89-320.  Notice  of  intention  to  apply  for  permit — activities  limited  by  terms  of  permit. 

89—321.  Contents  of  notice  of  intention. 

89-322.  Publication  of  notice  of  intention. 

89-323.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  by  applicant. 

89-324.  Permit  fee — time  of  payment. 

89-325.  Earmarked  revenue  fund. 

89—32(5.  Records  of  operations  maintained  by  licensees. 

S9-327.  Reports  of  operations. 

89-328.  Records  and  reports  open  to  public. 

89—329.  Termination  of  licenses  and  permits  by  board. 

89-330.  State  and  agents  not  liable  for  acts  of  private  persons. 

89  931.  Violation  as  misdemeanor — continuing  violations. 

89-301  to  89-309.     (349.54  to  349.02)  Repealed. 

repeal 

These  sections  (Sees.  1  to  9,  Ch.  176,  L.  1935),  relating  to  development  of  state 
resources  by  the  state  planning  board,  were  repealed  by  Sec.  10,  Ch.  19,  Laws 
1967. 


555 


89-310.  Definitions.  Unless  the  context  requires  otherwise,  in  this  chapter: 

(1)  "Weather  modification  and  control"  means  changing  or  controlling,  or  at- 
tempting to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods,  the  natural  development  of 
atmospheric  cloud  forms  or  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in  the  troposphere. 

(2)  "Research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration  and 
experimentation,  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  and  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and 
demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of 
models,  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  processes. 

(3)  "Department"  means  the  department  of  natural  resources  and  conservation 
provided  for  in  Title  82A,  chapter  15. 

(4)  "Board"  means  the  board  of  natural  resources  and  conservation  provided 
for  in  section  82A-1509. 

89-312.  Acquistion  of  property — acceptance  and  expenditure  of  funds — re- 
search and  development  authority.  In  addition  to  any  other  acts  authorized  by  law 
the  department  may : 

(1)  acquire  materials,  equipment  and  facilities  as  are  necessary  to  per- 
form its  duties  under  this  act ; 

(2)  receive  any  funds  which  may  be  offered  or  become  available  from 
federal  grants  or  appropriations,  private  gifts,  donations,  bequests,  or  any 
other  source  and  unless  their  use  is  restricted,  may  expend  the  funds  for 
the  administration  of  this  act ; 

(3)  make  such  studies  and  investigations,  and  obtain  such  information 
as  the  department  may  deem  necessary  in  exercising  its  authority  in  the 
administration  or  enforcement  of  this  act ; 

(4)  co-operate  with  public  or  private  agencies  in  the  performance  of  the 
department's  functions  or  duties  and  in  furtherance  of  the  purposes  of  this 
act ; 

(5)  represent  the  state  in  any  and  all  matters  pertaining  to  plans,  proce- 
dures or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  relating  to  weather  modifica- 
tion and  control ; 

(6)  enter  into  co-operative  agreements  with  the  United  States  gov- 
ernment or  any  of  its  agencies,  or  with  the  various  counties  and  cities  of  this 
state  or  with  any  private  or  public  agencies  for  conducting  weather  modifica- 

.  tion  or  cloud  seeding  operations  ; 

(7)  act  for  and  represent  the  state  and  the  counties,  cities  and  private  or 
public  agencies  in  contracting  with  private  concerns  for  the  performance  of 
weather  modifications  or  cloud  seeding  operations  ;  and 

(8)  conduct  and  may  make  arrangements  including  contracts  and  agree- 
ments for  the  conduct  of,  research  and  development  activities  relating  to : 

(a)  the  identification  and  evaluation  of  meteorological,  environ- 
mental, ecological,  agricultural,  economic,  hydrological  and  sociological 
impacts  of  weather  modification  in  Montana  ; 

(b)  the  theory  and  development  of  methods  of  weather  modification 
and  control,  including  processes,  materials  and  devices  relating  thereto ; 

(c)  the  utilization  of  weather  modification  and  control  for  agricul- 
tural, industrial,  commercial,  recreational  and  other  purposes ; 

,(d)  the  protection  of  life  and  property  during  research  and  opera- 
tional activities. 

89-312.1.  Standards  for  research  in  weather  modification  control.  The  board 
may  establish  by  rule  standards  and  instruction  to  govern  the  carrying  out  of 
research  and  development  or  projects  in  weather  modification  and  control  as  it 
deems  necessary  or  desirable  to  minimize  danger  to  health,  safety,  welfare  or 
property. 

89-313.  License  and  permit  required  for  weather  modification  and  control. 
No  person  shall  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control  except 
under,  and  in  accordance  with,  a  license  and  a  permit  issued  by  the  board 
authorizing  such  activities. 

89-314.  Department  to  review  applications — exemptions.  The  department  shall 
review  all  applications  for  weather  modification  activities,  and  the  board  may 
provide  by  rule  for  exempting  from  the  license  and  permit  requirements  of  this 
act: 

(1)  research,  development,  and  experiments  by  state  and  federal  agen- 
cies, institutions  of  higher  learning  and  bona  fide  nonprofit  research  orga- 
nizations and  their  agents ; 

(2)  laboratory  research  and  experiments  ; 


556 


(3)  activities  of  an  emergency  character  for  protection  against  fire, 
frost,  sleet,  or  fog :  and 

(4)  activities  normally  engaged  in  for  purposes  other  than  those  of 
inducing,  increasing,  decreasing,  or  preventing  precipitation  or  hail. 

8H-.il  ~>.  Issuance  of  license — qualifications  of  licensees.  The  license  to  engage 
in  the  field  of  meteorology  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  board.  If  the  applicant  is  an 
with  procedures  and  subject  to  conditions  the  board  may  by  rule  establish  to 
effectuate  the  provisions  of  this  act.  to  applicants  who  demonstrate  competence 
in  the  field  of  meteorology  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  board.  If  the  applicant  is  an 
organization,  these  requirements  must  be  met  by  the  individual  who  will  be 
in  charge  of  the  operation  for  the  applicant. 

89-316.  Term  of  license — renewal.  The  license  shall  be  issued  for  a  period 
to  expire  at  the  end  of  the  calendar  year  in  which  it  is  issued  and,  if  the 
licensee  possesses  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  a  new  license, 
shall  upon  application  be  renewed  at  the  expiration  of  the  period. 

59-517.  Lie.  use  fee  A  license  shall  be  issued  or  renewed  only  upon  the  pay- 
ment to  the  department  of  one  hundred  dollars  ($100)  for  the  license  or  renewal. 

89-318.  Issuance  of  permits — requirements  for  permit — hearing.  (1)  The  per- 
mits shall  he  issued  in  accordance  with  procedures  and  subject  to  conditions  the 
hoard  may  by  rule  establish  to  effectuate  this  chapter,  only  : 

( a )  if  the  applicant  is  licensed  pursuant  to  this  chapter  ; 
ili)  if  sufficient  notice  of  intention  is  published  and  proof  of  publication  is 
filed  as  required  in  section  89-322  ; 

(c)  if  an  applicant  furnishes  proof  of  financial  responsibility  in  an 
amount  to  be  determined  by  the  board  as  required  in  section  89-323; 

(d)  if  the  fee  for  the  permit  is  paid  as  required  in  section  89-324  ; 

(e)  if  the  weather  modification  and  control  activities  to  be  conducted  are 
determined  by  the  board  to  be  for  the  general  welfare  and  the  public  good. 

(2)  The  department  shall  hold  a  public  hearing  in  the  area  to  be  affected  by 
the  issuance  of  the  permit,  if  the  board  determines  that  a  hearing  is  necessary. 
The  department  may  in  its  discretion  assess  the  permit  applicant  for  the  costs 
incurred  by  the  department  in  holding  the  hearing. 

89-319.  Separate  permit  for  each  operation.  '"Operation"  means  the  per- 
formance of  weather  modification  and  control  activities  entered  into  for  the 
purpose  of  producing  or  attempting  to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within 
ime  (1)  geographical  area  over  one  continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one 
(1)  year. 

89h320.  Notice  of  intention  to  apply  for  permit — activities  limited  by  terms 
of  permit.  Before  undertaking  any  weather  modification  and  control  activities, 
the  applicant  for  a  permit  shall  file  with  the  department,  and  also  have  published, 
a  notice  of  intention.  If  a  permit  is  issued,  the  holder  of  the  permit  shall  confine 
his  activities  to  the  time  and  area  limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention, 
unless  modified  by  the  board.  His  activities  shall  conform  to  any  conditions 
imposed  by  the  board.  The  permit  may  not  be  sold  or  transferred. 

89^-821.  Contents  of  notice  of  intention.  The  notice  of  intention  shall  set 
forth  at  least  the  following: 

(1)  the  name  and  address  of  the  applicant ; 

(2)  the  nature,  purpose,  and  objective  of  the  intended  operation  and 
the  person  or  organization  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted  : 

(3)  the  area  in  which,  and  the  approximate  time  during  which,  the 
operation  will  be  conducted  ; 

(4)  the  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation: 

(5)  the  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation. 
(History  :  En.  Sec.  12,  Ch.  20.  L.  1967.) 

89-o22.  Publication  of  notice  of  intention,  (1)  The  applicant  shall  have 
notice  of  intention,  or  that  portion  thereof  including  the  items  specified  in  section 
89-321,  published  at  least  once  a  week  for  two  (2)  consecutive  weeks  in  a  news- 
paper  having  a  general  circulation  and  published  within  any  county  in  which 
the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or.  if 
the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in  more  than  one  (1)  county  or  if  the  affected 
area  is  located  in  more  than  one  (1)  county  or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than 
the  one  in  which  t lie  operation  is  to  be  conducted,  then  in  newspapers  having  a 
general  circulation  and  published  within  each  of  the  counties. 

<2>  Proof  of  publication,  made  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  shall  be  filed 
by  the  applicant  with  the  department  sooner  than  the  sixteenth  day  after  the 
date  of  the  last  publication  of  the  notice. 


557 


89-323.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  by  applicant.  Proof  of  financial  re- 
sponsibility may  be  furnished  by  an  applicant  by  his  showing,  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  board,  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for  liability  which  might  reasonably 
be  attached  to,  or  result  from,  his  weather  modification  and  control  activities. 

(History :  En.  Sec.  14,  Ch.  20.  L.  1967.) 

89-324.  Permit  fee — time  of  payment.  The  fee  to  be  paid  by  each  applicant  for 
a  permit  shall  be  equivalent  to  one  per  cent  (1%)  of  the  estimated  cost  of  such 
operation,  the  estimated  cost  to  be  computed  by  the  department  from  the  evidence 
available  to  it.  The  fee  is  due  and  payable  to  the  department  as  of  the  date  of 
issuance  of  the  permit  by  the  board ;  however,  if  the  applicant  is  able  to  give 
satisfactory  security  for  the  payment  of  the  balance  he  may  be  permitted  to  com- 
mence the  operation,  and  a  permit  may  be  issued  therefor,  upon  the  payment  of 
not  less  than  fifty  per  cent  (50%)  of  the  fee.  The  balance  due  shall  be  paid 
within  three  (3)  months  from  the  date  of  termination  of  the  operation  as  pre- 
scribed in  the  permit. 

89-325.  Earmarked  revenue  fund.  All  license  and  permit  fees  and  fines  col- 
lected under  this  chapter  shall  be  deposited  in  the  earmarked  revenue  fund  for 
use  by  the  department  in  the  administration  of  this  chapter. 

89-326.  Records  of  operations  maintained  by  licensees.  Every  licensee  shall 
keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  conducted  by  him  under  his  license 
and  each  permit,  showing : 

(1)  The  method  employed ; 

(2)  Type  of  equipment  used ; 

(3)  Kinds  and  amounts  of  material  used  ; 

(4)  Times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equipment ; 

(5)  Names  and  addresses  of  all  individuals  participating  or  assisting  in 
the  operation : 

(6)  Any  other  general  information  as  the  department  may  require. 
89-327.    Reports  of  operations.  The  department  shall  require  written  reports, 

in  a  manner  as  it  provides,  of  each  operation  for  which  a  permit  is  issued.  The 
department  shall  also  require  reports  from  any  organization  that  is  exempt  from 
license  and  permit  requirements  as  provided  in  section  89-314. 

89-328.  Records  and  reports  open  to  public.  The  records  and  reports  in  the 
custody  of  the  department  shall  be  open  for  public  examination. 

89-329.  Termination  of  licenses  and  permits  by  board.  After  notice  to  the 
licensee  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a  hearing,  the  board  may  modify,  sus- 
pend, revoke,  or  refuse  to  renew,  any  license  or  permit  issued  if  it  appears  that 
the  licensee  no  longer  possesses  the  qualifications  necessary  or  if  it  appears  that 
the  licensee  has  violated  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act ;  or  in  the  case  of  a 
modification,  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  health  or  the  property 
of  any  person. 

(History  :  En.  Sec.  20,  Ch.  20,  L.  1967.) 

89-330.  State  and  agents  not  liable  for  acts  of  private  persons.  Nothing  in  this 
act  shall  be  construed  to  impose  or  accept  any  liability  or  responsibility  on  the 
part  of  the  state,  the  board,  the  department  or  any  state  officials  or  employees  for 
any  weather  modification  and  control  activities  of  any  private  person  or  group. 

89-331.  Violation  as  misdemeanor — continuing  violations.  A  person  violating 
any  provision  of  this  act  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  a  continuing  violation  is 
punishable  as  a  separate  offense  for  each  day  during  which  it  occurs. 

Nebraska 

Neb.  Rev.  Stat.  §§2-2401—2-2449;  81-829.45 

Article  24 — Weather  Control 
(a)  Weather  Control  Commission 

Sec. 

2-2401.  Weather  control ;  declaration  of  policy. 
2-2402.  Weather  control :  terms,  defined. 

2-2403.  Weather  Control  Commission  ;  administration  of  act :  Department  of  Agriculture. 
2-2404.  Weather  Control  Commission  ;  establishment ;  composition  ;  appointment ;  term  ; 

no  salary  ;  expenses. 
2-2405.  Weather  Control  Commission  ;  duties. 

2—2406.  Weather  control ;  modification  activities  ;  license  ;  issuance  :  expiration  ;  revocation. 
2-2407.  Weather  control;  artificial  precipitation:  application;  license;  fees;  payment  to 

State  Treasurer  ;  credited  to  General  Fund. 
2—2408.  Weather  Control  Commission  :  cooperation  with  other  agencies. 

2-2409.  Weather  control :  engaging  in  artificial  weather  modification  without  license ; 
violation  ;  penalty. 

34-S57— 79— 3S 


558 


(b)  Weather  Control  Districts 

See. 

2-2410  to  2-2427.  Repealed.  Laws  1959,  c.  9.  §  24. 
2-2428.  Weather  control  districts  ;  authorization. 

2-2429.  Weather  control  districts  ;  initiation  ;  petition  ;  signatures  required. 
2-2430.  Weather  control  districts  :  petition  ;  contents. 

2-2431.  Weather  control  districts  ;  examination  of  petition  ;  order  for  hearing  ;  notice. 

2-2432.  Weather  control  districts  ;  hearing  ;  change  of  boundaries. 

2-2433.  Weather  control  districts  ;  hearing  ;  order  ;  appeal. 

2-2434.  Weather  control  districts  ;  Secretary  of  State  ;  election  ;  fix  date. 

2-2435.  Weather  control  districts  :  notice  to  election  commissioner  or  county  clerk  ;  state- 
ment of  question  to  be  submitted. 

2-2436.  Weather  control  districts  ;  election  commissioner  or  county  clerk  ;  notice  of  elec- 
tion :  publication. 

2-2437.  Weather  control  district ;  election  ;  how  conducted  ;  certification  of  results  ;  resub- 
mission of  question. 

2-2438.  Weather  control  district ;  body  politic  ;  sue  and  be  sued  ;  directors  not  liable  for 
debts. 

2-2439.  Weather  control  district ;  board  of  directors  :  oath  ;  bond  :  vacancies. 
2-2440.  Weather  control  district ;  board  of  directos  ;  election  of  successors  ;  no  filing  fee 
required. 

2-2441.  Weather  control  district :  board  of  directors  ;  no  compensation  ;  expenses. 

2-2442.  Weather  control  district ;  officers  :  election  ;  books  :  records  ;  audit. 

2-2443.  Weather  control  district ;  board  of  directors  :  general  powers. 

2—2444.  Weather  control  district ;  taxes  :  levy  ;  limit  of  levy  ;  certification  ;  collection. 

2-2445.  Weather  control  district ;  warrants  ;  issuance  ;  payment :  registration  ;  interest. 

2-244(3.  Weather  control  district ;  program  for  weather  control ;  contact ;  seeding  outside 
of  boundaries  of  district ;  violation  ;  penalty. 

2-2447.  Weather  control  district ;  dissolution  of  district ;  election  ;  how  conducted ;  dis- 
posal of  funds  ;  debts  ;  tax  ;  levy. 

2  2448.  Weather  control  district ;  act ;  how  cited. 

2-2449.  Weather  control  district ;  formed  under  prior  act :  validation. 

(a)  Weather  Control  Commission 

2-2 401.  Weather  control;  declaration  of  policy.  (1)  It  is  hereby  declared  that 
the  State  of  Nebraska  claims  its  sovereign  right  to  tbe  use,  for  the  best  interests 
of  its  residents,  of  the  moisture  contained  in  the  clouds  and  atmosphere  within  its 
sovereign  state  boundaries. 

(2)  While  weather  modification  is  at  present  a  reality,  the  ultimate  extent  to 
which  it  may  be  utilized  is  speculative.  The  application  of  such  measures  should 
have  proper  safeguards  and  supply  sufficient  data  and  accurate  information  in 
order  to  protect  life,  property  and  the  public  interest. 

Source  :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  1,  p.  101. 

2-2J/02.  Weather  control;  terms,  defined.  When  used  in  sections  2-2401  to 
2-2409,  unless  the  context  otherwise  requires  : 

(1)  Commission  shall  mean  the  Weather  Control  Commission  created  by 
sections  2-2401  to  2-2409  ; 

(2)  Department  shall  mean  the  Department  of  Agriculture  ; 

(3)  Experimentation  and  research  and  development,  shall  mean  theoretical 
exploration  and  experimentation  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and 
theories  of  a  scientific  or  technical  nature  in  the  practical  application  for  experi- 
mental and  demonstrative  purposes,  including  the  experimental  producing  and 
testing  of  model  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  processes :  and 

(4)  Weather  modification  shall  mean  initiating,  changing,  or  controlling  tbe 
course  or  effects  of  tbe  forces,  measures,  and  otber  factors  constituting  weather 
phenomena,  including  temperature,  wind  direction  and  velocity,  and  tbe  inducing. 
Li  creasing,  decreasing,  and  preventing  by  artificial  methods,  of  precipitation 
in  the  form  of  rain.  snow.  hail,  sleet,  mist,  or  fog. 

Source  :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  2,  p.  101. 

2-2/f0->.  Weather  Control  Commission;  administration  of  act;  Depart  went  o£ 
Agriculture.  Tbe  department  shall  administer  and  enforce  the  provisions  of 
sections  2-2401  to  2-2409  and  shall  have  and  may  exercise  any  or  all  of  the  admin- 
istrative powers  conferred  hereinafter  by  sections  2-2401  to  2-2409. 

Source  :  Laws  1957,  c.  7.  §  3,  p.  101. 

2-2'iOJf.  Weather  Control  Commission;  establishment;  composition;  appoint- 
ment; term;  no  salary;  crpenses.  There  is  hereby  established  a  Weather  Control 
Commission,  composed  of  the  Director  of  Agriculture,  the  Dean  of  the  College 
of  Agriculture  of  tbe  University  of  Nebraska,  the  Director  of  the  Conservation 
and  Survey  Division  of  the  University  of  Nebraska,  the  head  of  the  physics 
department  of  the  University  of  Nebraska,  and  four  additional  members,  inter- 
ested in  weather  modification,  who  shall  be  appointed  annually  by  the  Governor 
for  a  one-year  term  commencing  January  1.  The  members  of  the  commission 


559 


shall  serve  without  salary,  but  shall  be  reimbursed  for  their  actual  and  necessary 

expenses  while  in  the  performance  of  their  duties. 

Source  :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  4,  p.  102.  m 

2-2J,05.  Weather  Control  Commission;  duties.  The  Commission  shall  perform 

the  following  duties :  .    ■      .  , 

(1)  Elect  annually  from  its  membership  a  chairman,  vice-chairman,  and 

(2)  Determine  the  procedures,  requirements,  conditions,  and  professional 
standards  under  which  licenses  to  applicants  to  conduct  artificial  weather  modi- 
fication operations  may  be  issued  ; 

(3)  Determine  who  shall  be  issued  a  license,  and  make  recommendations  to  the 
department  which  shall  issue  the  license ; 

(4)  Approve  the  areas  in  which  each  operator  is  to  work  ;  and 

(5)  The  commission,  in  order  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  sections 
2-2401  to  2-2409,  is  authorized  and  empowered:  (a)  To  promulgate  and  enforce 
such  rules  and  regulations  as  may  be  deemed  proper  and  necessary  ;  (b)  to  appoint 
a  qualified  individual,  organization,  or  institution  to  evaluate  and  publish  the 
effects  of  all  operations  conducted  in  the  state,  and  employ  such  clerical  help  as 
is  necessary  ;  (c)  to  recommend  to  the  department  the  revocation  of  licenses,  for 
cause,  if,  after  holding  hearing,  they  so  determine;  (d)  to  enter  into  any  con- 
tracts or  memoranda  of  agreement  as  are  necessary;  and  (e)  to  authorize  the 
department  to  expend  such  funds  as  may  be  made  available  to  it. 

Source  :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  5,  p.  102. 

2-2406.  Weather  control;  modification  activities;  license;  issuance;  expiration  ; 
revocation.  (1)  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  private  person  or  persons,  corpora- 
tion, institution,  or  individual  group  to  engage  in  activities  for  artificial  weather 
modification  except  under  and  in  accordance  with  a  license  issued  by  the  depart- 
ment. The  department  shall  issue  such  license  only  upon  the  recommendation  of 
the  Weather  Control  Commission. 

(2)  Each  such  license  shall  expire  on  December  31  of  each  year  and  shall  be 
revocable  at  any  time  prior  to  such  date  by  the  department  upon  recommendation 
of  the  commission,  in  accordance  with  such  procedure  as  the  commission  may 
establish. 

Source  :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  6,  p.  103. 

2-2'f0~i.  Weather  control;  artificial  precipitation;  application;  license;  fees: 
payment  to  State  Treasurer;  credited  to  General  Fund. 

(1)  Any  person  desiring  to  cause,  or  attempting  to  cause,  condensation  of 
precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  at- 
mosphere, or  who  shall  prevent  or  attempt  to  prevent  by  artificial  means  the 
natural  condensation  Or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in  any 
form  contained  in  the  atmosphere  shall  make  application  to  the  department  in 
writing,  on  forms  supplied  by  the  department,  to  do  so.  Each  application  shall  be 
accompanied  by  a  fee  of  fifty  dollars. 

(2)  Any  person  issued  a  license  to  do  any  of  the  acts  specified  in  subsection 
(1)  of  this  section  shall  pay  a  fee  of  two  hundred  dollars. 

(3)  Xo  fee  shall  be  charged  for  experimental  or  research  work. 

(4)  The  money  collected  from  such  fees  shall  be  deposited  with  the  state 
treasury  and  by  the  State  Treasurer  credited  to  the  General  Fund. 

Source :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  7,  p.  103 ;  Laws  1965,  c.  8,  §  6,  p.  91 
2-21,08.  Weather  Control  Commission.;  cooperation  with  other  agencies.  The 
commission  shall  cooperate  with  the  federal  government  and  its  agents  and 
contractors,  and  with  other  states,  in  the  conduct  of  artificial  weather  modifi- 
cation operations. 

Source  :  Laws  1957.  c.  7,  §  8,  p.  104. 

2-2Jf08.  Weather  Control  Commission ;  cooperation  with  other  agencies.  The 
license;  violation  ;  penalty.  Any  private  person  engaging  in  any  type  of  artificial 
weather  modification  without  having  first  procured  a  license  as  required  by 
sections  2-2401  to  2-2409  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  shall,  upon  con- 
viction thereof,  be  fined  not  less  than  three  hundred  dollars  nor  more  than  eight 
hundred  dollars. 

Source :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  9,  p.  104. 

(b)  Weather  Control  Districts 
2-2 'f  10  to  2-2 ',27.  Repealed.  Laws  1959.  c.  9,  §  24. 

Weather  Control  Act  of  1957  was  unconstitutional  as  unlawful  delegation  of  legislative 
Powers.  Sununerville  v.  North  Platte  Valley  Weather  Control  Dist.,  170  Neb.  46,  101  N  W 
2d  748. 


560 


2-2^28.  Weather  control  districts;  authorisation.  Weather  control  districts 
may  be'  formed  in  the  manner,  and  having  the  power,  provided  in  section  2-2428 
to  2-2449. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  1,  p.  107. 

2-2429.  Weather  control  districts;  initiation;  petition;  signatures  required. 
Proceedings  for  the  establishment  of  a  weather  control  district  may  be  initiated 
only  by  the  filing  of  a  petition  with  the  Department  of  Agriculture.  The  petition 
shall  be  signed  by  not  less  than  twelve  resident  owners  of  land  in  each  of  a  major- 
ity of  the  precincts  lying  wholly  or  partly  within  the  proposed  district. 

Source :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  2,  p.  107. 

2-2430.  Weather  control  districts;  petition;  contents.  (1)  The  petition  referred 
to  in  section  2-2429  shall  set  forth  : 

(a)  The  proposed  name  of  the  district ; 

(b)  A  description  of  the  territory  proposed  to  be  included  in  the  district, 
together  with  the  proposed  boundaries  of  such  district  and  the  divisions 
thereof  for  the  purpose  of  election  of  directors ;  a  map  showing  such  bounda- 
ries ;  and  that  property  within  the  proposed  district  will  be  benefited  by  the 
organization  of  such  district ; 

(c)  A  recommendation  as  to  the  number  and  terms  of  directors  that  the 
district  shall  have  if  formed,  together  with  the  name,  address,  terms  of  office, 
and  division  to  be  represented  of  each  of  the  proposed  directors,  who  shall 
serve  until  their  successors  are  elected  and  qualified,  designating  their 
terms  so  that  not  more  than  one-third  shall  terminate  every  two  years ; 

(d)  Where  the  offices  of  such  proposed  district  are  to  be  maintained;  and 

(e)  A  prayer  that  the  organization  of  the  district  be  submitted  to  a  vote 
of  the  electors  who  own  taxable  property  except  intangible  property  within 
such  district. 

(2)  No  petition  for  the  organization  of  a  district  under  sections  2-2428  to 
2-2449  with  the  requisite  signatures  shall  be  declared  null  and  void  on  account 
of  minor  defects,  but  the  department  may  at  any  time,  prior  to  final  determination 
of  the  sufficiency  thereof,  permit  the  petition  to  be  amended  in  form  and  sub- 
stance to  conform  to  the  facts.  Several  similar  petitions  or  duplicate  copies  of  the 
same  petition  for  the  organization  of  the  same  district  may  be  filed  and  shall 
together  be  regarded  as  one  petition.  All  petitions  filed  prior  to  the  determination 
of  the  sufficiency  of  such  petition,  shall  be  considered  as  though  filed  with  the 
first  petition  placed  on  file. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  3,  p.  108. 

2-2431.  Weather  control  districts;  examination  of  petition;  order  for  hear- 
ing; notice.  The  Department  of  Agriculture  shall  examine  the  petition  and  if 
it  finds  that  the  same  bears  the  requisite  number  of  signatures  and  otherwise 
meets  the  requirements  of  sections  2-2428  to  2-2449,  it  shall  fix  a  time  and  place 
for  hearing  upon  such  petition  and  cause  notice  thereof  to  be  given  to  all  per- 
sons having  any  interest  in  the  organization  of  the  proposed  district  by  pub- 
lication in  each  of  the  counties  lying  wholly  or  partly  within  the  proposed 
district  once  each  week  for  two  consecutive  weeks  in  a  legal  newspaper  or  news- 
papers of  general  circulation  in  such  counties.  Such  notice  shall  state  (1)  the 
fact  of  filing  of  the  petition;  (2)  in  summary  form,  the  information  required  by 
subsection  (1)  of  section  2-2430  to  be  included  in  the  petition;  (3)  the  purpose 
of  the  formation  of  such  proposed  district;  (4)  the  time  and  place  of  hearing 
such  petition;  and  (5)  the  purpose  of  such  hearing.  Such  hearing  shall  be  held 
at  such  time  and  place  as  designated  by  the  department,  not  less  than  twenty 
days  nor  more  than  forty  days  after  the  filing  of  the  petition. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  4,  p.  109. 

2-2432.  Weather  control  districts;  hearing;  change  of  "boundaries.  At  the  time 
of  the  hearing,  the  Department  of  Agriculture  shall  receive  any  competent  and 
relevant  evidence  which  may  be  produced  by  any  person  interested  in  the  orga- 
nization of  such  district  in  support  of  or  against  the  petition.  If  the  department 
finds  that  the  boundaries  proposed  by  the  petitioners  should  be  changed,  it  shall 
change  the  same  and  fix  the  boundaries  where  the  same,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
department,  should  be  fixed  with  a  view  to  doing  justice  and  equity  to  all  per- 
sons; Provided,  that  if  the  department  deems  it  proper  to  include  in  the  dis- 
trict any  territory  not  included  in  the  boundaries  proposed  by  the  petitioners, 
it  shall  first  cause  notice  of  its  intention  to  do  so  to  be  mailed  to  each  owner 
of  land  within  the  territory  proposed  to  be  included.  Such  notice  shall  describe 
the  territory  so  proposed  to  be  included  in  the  proposed  district  and  fix  a  time 


561 


and  place,  not  less  than  one  week  nor  more  than  three  weeks  from  the  date  of 
mailing  thereof,  when  all  persons  interested  may  appear  and  be  heard. 
Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  5,  p.  109. 

2-2433.  Weather  control  districts;  hearing  order;  appeal.  If  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  determines  that  the  organization  of  such  district  would  be  de- 
sirable and  necessary  in  the  interest  of  the  public  welfare,  it  shall  within  ten 
|  days  after  the  final  hearing  enter  an  order  (1)  approving  the  petition  and 
amendments  thereto,  if  made;  and  (2)  fixing  the  boundaries  of  the  proposed 
district  and  the  divisions  thereof  for  the  purpose  of  election  of  directors,  which 
order  shall  be  deemed  a  final  order  for  purposes  of  review  to  the  district  court 
on  appeal.  Any  person  owning  taxable  property,  except  intangible  property,, 
within  the  proposed  district  aggrieved  by  the  order  of  the  department  approving 
the  petition  or  fixing  the  boundaries,  may  appeal  from  such  order  to  the  district 
court  of  the  comity  wherein  the  office  of  the  district  is  maintained.  The  proce- 
dure for  and  upon  such  appeal  shall  be  nearly  as  possible  the  same  as  is  provided 
for  appeals  from  final  orders  on  claims  presented  to  the  county  board  of  such 
county. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  6,  p.  110. 

2-2434.  Weather  control  districts;  Secretary  of  State;  election;  fix  date.  If 
no  appeal  is  taken  from  the  order  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  or  upon 
final  determination  by  the  court,  the  department  shall  deliver  to  the  Secretary 
of  State  a  copy  of  the  order  or  orders  of  the  department  or  court  and  the  peti- 
tions as  approved  by  the  department,  along  with  a  request  that  the  question 
of  the  organization  of  the  district  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  electors  who  own 
taxable  property,  except  intangible  property,  within  such  district  as  prayed  for  in 
the  petition.  Upon  receipt  of  such  request,  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  fix  the 
date  of  such  election,  which  may  be  held  either  as  a  special  election  or  at  any 
general  election.  Such  election  shall  be  so  scheduled  that  the  notice  required  by 
section  2-2435  can  be  given. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  7,  p.  110. 

2-2435.  Weather  control  districts;  notice  to  election  commissioner  or  county 
clerk;  statement  of  question  to  be  submitted.  The  Secretary  of  State  shall  give 
notice  of  the  scheduling  of  such  election  to  the  election  commissioners,  or  county 
clerks  in  those  counties  not  having  an  election  commissioner,  of  each  county 
to  be  embraced  in  whole  or  in  part  within  such  district.  Such  notice  shall  contain 
a  statement  of  the  question  to  be  submitted  at  such  election,  the  area  in  which 
such  election  is  to  be  held,  and  the  date  thereof. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  8,  p.  110. 

2-2436.  Weather  control  districts;  election  commissioner  or  county  clerk ;  notice 
of  election ;  publication.  The  election  commissioner  or  county  clerk,  whichever  is 
appropriate,  shall  publish  a  notice  once  each  week,  three  consecutive  weeks,  in  a 
legal  newspaper  having  general  circulation  in  his  county,  which  notice  shall 
state:  (1)  The  fact  of  filing  of  the  petition ;  (2)  in  summary  form,  the  informa- 
tion required  by  subsection  (1)  of  section  2-2430  to  be  included  in  the  petition; 
(3)  that  an  election  will  be  held  to  decide  the  question  of  organization  of  the 
proposed  district;  (4)  the  date  of  such  election  ;  (5)  the  polling  places  at  which 
such  election  is  to  be  held;  (6)  a  statement  that  all  electors  who  own  taxable 
property,  except  intangible  property,  within  such  district  shall  be  entitled  to  vote 
at  such  election;  and  (7)  the  specific  question  to  be  submitted. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  9,  p.  110. 

2-2437.  Weather  control  district;  election;  how  conducted;  certification  of  re- 
sults; resubmission  of  question.  The  ballots  cast  at  such  election  shall  be  counted 
and  canvassed  as  nearly  as  practicable  in  the  same  manner  as  for  elections  gen- 
erally. Not  later  than  one  week  after  the  holding  of  such  election,  the  election 
commissioners  or  county  clerks,  whichever  is  appropriate,  shall  certify  the  results 
thereof  to  the  Secretary  of  State.  The  Secretary  of  State  shall  tabulate  the  re- 
sults so  certified  to  him,  and  if  he  finds  fifty-five  per  cent  of  those  voting  in  such 
election  voted  in  favor  of  the  organization  of  the  proposed  district,  he  shall  so 
certify  to  the  county  clerk  in  each  of  the  counties  lying  in  whole  or  in  part  within 
such  district,  and  the  district  shall  thereupon  be  fully  organized ;  Provided,  that 
if  the  ballots  cast  in  any  precinct,  or  part  of  a  precinct  when  the  entire  precinct 
is  not  included  in  the  proposed  district,  in  favor  of  the  organization  of  the  pro- 
posed district  are  less  than  fifty-five  per  cent  of  the  total  ballots  cast,  then  such 
precinct  or  part  thereof  shall  not  be  included  in  the  proposed  district.  If  the 
proposition  to  form  such  district  is  defeated  at  the  election,  the  proposition  may 
again  be  submitted  after  the  lapse  of  one  year  from  the  rejection  thereof  upon 


562 


the  filing  of  a  new  petition  therefor.  If  the  proposition  to  form  a  district  is 
approved  by  fifty-five  per  cent  of  those  voting  on  the  proposition  as  provided  in 
this  section,  then  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  annually  submit  the  proposition  to 
electors  of  the  district  for  three  consecutive  years  as  to  whether  the  district  shall 
he  continued  or  dissolved.  If  the  electors  vote  to  dissolve,  the  district  shall  be 
dissolved  as  provided  in  section  2-2447. 
Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9.  §  10.  p.  111. 

2-24-38.  Weather  control  district;  body  politic;  sue  and  be  sued;  directors  not 
liable  for  debts.  A  district  formed  under  the  provisions  of  sections  2-2428  to  2-2449 
shall  be  a  body  politic,  and  may  sue  and  be  sued  in  its  own  name,  and  no  liability 
shall  result  to  its  directors  on  account  of  debts  or  other  obligations  of  the  district. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9.  §  11,  p.  112. 

2-24-39.  "Weather  control  district;  board  of  directors;  oath;  bond;  vacancies. 
Each  member  of  the  board  of  directors  shall  be  a  resident  landowner  in  such  dis- 
trict. He  shall  take  an  oath  of  office,  and  shall  give  bond  in  the  sum  of  five 
thousand  dollars  conditioned  that  he  shall  faithfully  perform  the  duties  of  direc- 
tor and  of  such  further  office  to  which  he  may  be  elected  in  such  district,  and 
shall  account  for  all  funds  or  property  coming  into  his  hands  as  such  director  or 
other  officer.  The  treasurer  of  the  district  shall  also  give  a  corporate  surety  bond 
in  an  amount  sufficient  to  cover  all  money  coming  into  his  possession  or  control. 
Each  such  bond  shall  run  to  the  district,  be  signed  by  a  surety  or  sureties 
approved  by  the  Secretary  of  State  and  shall  be  filed  and  recorded  in  the  office  of 
the  Secretary  of  State.  When  such  bond  is  so  filed  and  approved,  such  person  so 
elected  shall  take  and  hold  office  until  his  successor  is  elected  and  qualified. 
When  a  vacancy  occurs  on  the  board,  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  the  remain- 
ing members  of  the  board. 

Source :  Laws  1959.  c.  9.  §  12.  p.  112. 

2-24  40-  Weather  control  district;  board  of  directors;  election  of  successors ;  no 
filirirj  fee  required.  As  the  terms  of  members  of  the  board  of  directors  expire,  their 
successors  shall  be  elected  in  the  manner  provided  for  election  of  directors  of 
public  power  districts.  No  filing  fee  shall  be  required  of  candidates  filing  for  the 
office  of  director  of  a  weather  control  district. 

Source  :  Laws  1959.  c.  9.  §  13.  p.  112. 

2-2441-  Weather  control  district;  board  of  directors;  no  compensation  ;  ex- 
penses. The  members  of  the  board  of  directors  shall  receive  no  compensation,  but 
shall  be  paid  their  actual  expenses  while  engaged  in  the  business  of  such  district. 

Source  :  Laws  1959.  c.  9,  §  14,  p.  112. 

2-2442.  Weather  control  district ;  officers;  election;  books;  records;  audit.  The 
board  of  directors  shall  annually  elect  a  president,  vice  president,  secretary, 
treasurer,  and  such  other  officers  as  may  be  necessary.  Such  board  shall  hold 
rotrular  meetings  in  its  office  at  least  once  each  calendar  quarter  and  such  special 
meetings  as  may  be  required  for  the  proper  transaction  of  business.  Notice  of  all 
meetings  of  the  board  must  be  published  in  a  newspaper  of  general  circulation  in 
ti  e  district  not  less  than  seven  nor  more  than  fourteen  days  prior  to  the  holding 
of  such  meeting,  which  notice  shall  state  the  time,  date,  and  place  thereof,  and, 
in  case  of  a  special  meeting,  the  purpose  thereof.  The  board  shall  cause  to  be  kept 
accurate  minutes  of  its  meetings  and  accurate  records  and  books  of  account,  con- 
forming to  approved  methods  of  bookkeeping,  clearly  setting  out  and  reflecting 
the  operation,  management,  and  business  of  the  district.  Snch  books  and  records 
shall  be  kept  at  the  offices  of  the  district  and  shall  be  open  to  public  inspection 
during  normal  business  hours.  The  board  shall  cause  to  be  published  at  the  close 
of  each  regular  or  special  meeting  a  brief  statement  of  the  proceedings  thereof 
in  ;)  newspaper  of  general  circulation  in  the  district.  At  the  close  of  each  year's 
business,  the  board  shall  cause  an  audit  of  the  books,  records,  and  financial  affairs 
of  the  district  to  be  made  by  a  certified  public  accountant  or  firm  of  such  account- 
ants, who  shall  be  selected  by  the  board,  and  the  report,  of  such  audit  shall  be 
kept  on  file  at  the  district's  office  for  inspection  by  any  interested  party. 

Source  :  I  aws  1059,  c.  9.  §  15.  p.  112. 

£—2448'  Weather  control  district ;  board  o-f  directors ;  general  povers.  The  board 
of  directors  shall  have  authority  to  :  (1)  Maintain  and  equip  an  office,  and  employ 
such  persons  as  may  be  needed  :  (2)  gather  information  concerning  weather  con- 
trol :  (3)  aid  or  conduct,  alone  or  in  conjunction  with  other  districts,  any  program 
of  weather  control ;  (4)  contract  with  any  private  individual,  association,  or  cor- 
poration, or  with  any  governmental  acreney.  engaged  in  weather  control,  for  per- 
formance of  the  activities  mentined  in  subdivisions  (2)  and  (3)  of  this  section; 
( 5  I  disseminate,  by  publication,  or  by  press,  radio,  or  television  release,  or  other- 


563 


wise,  information  concerning  weather  control;  (6)  participate  in  any  federal 
grant-in-aid  program  which  has  been  or  which  might  be  established;  and  (7) 
lew  a  tax  as  provided  in  section  2-2444. 
Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  16,  p.  113. 

2-2JfU.  Weather  control  district;  taxes;  levy;  limit  of  levy;  certification;  col- 
lection. The  board  of  directors  shall,  prior  to  August  1  of  each  year,  prepare  an 
estimate  showing  the  amount  of  money  required  to  finance  the  activities  of  the 
district  for  the  ensuing  year  and  may  levy  and  collect  each  year  the  taxes  neces- 
sary to  finance  the  activities  of  such  district  for  the  ensuing  year  to  the  amount 
of  not  more  than  one  mill  on  the  dollar  of  the  assessed  value  of  all  taxable  prop- 
erty, except  intangible  property,  within  such  district.  It  shall,  on  or  before  the 
hist  day  of  August  in  each  year,  certify  its  mill  levy  to  the  county  clerks  of  the 
counties  wholly  or  partially  within  the  district,  who  shall  extend  the  same  on 
the  county  tax  list,  and  the  same  shall  be  collected  by  the  county  treasurer  in  the 
same  manner  as  state  and  county  taxes.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  board  to  apply 
for  and  to  receive  from  the  county  treasurers  all  money  to  the  credit  of  the  dis- 
trict. The  county  treasurers  shall  disburse  the  same  to  the  order  of  the  treasurer 
of  the  district. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  IS.  p.  113. 

Z-2445,  Weather  control  district;  warrants;  issuance;  payment;  registration ; 
interest.  All  claims  against  weather  control  districts  may  be  paid  by  warrants  or 
orders,  duly  drawn  on  the  treasurer  of  such  district,  signed  by  the  president  and 
countersigned  by  the  secretary.  When  such  warrants  or  orders  have  been  issued 
and  delivered,  they  may  be  presented  to  the  treasurer  of  the  district,  and  if  such 
be  the  fact,  endorsed  Not  paid  for  want  of  funds.  Such  warrants  or  orders  shall 
be  registered  by  the  treasurer  in  the  order  of  presentation,  shall  draw  interest  at 
the  rate  of  seven  per  cent  per  annum  from  the  date  of  registration  thereof,  and 
shall  be  received  by  the  county  treasurers  in  payment  of  weather  control  district 
taxes  levied  pursuant  to  section  2-2444. 

Source  :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  19,  p.  114. 

2-2J/J{6.  Weather  control  district;  program  for  ireather  control ;  contract ;  seed- 
ing outside  of  boundaries  of  district ;  violation  ;  penalty.  Tbe  board  of  directors 
shall  not  be  required  to  conduct,  or  contract  for.  any  program  of  weather  control 
for  any  year  in  which  it  does  not  appear  that  such  program  would  be  of  substan- 
tial benefit  to  the  district.  In  the  event  any  program  of  weather  control  is  con- 
ducted within  any  such  weather  control  district  organized  under  sections  2-2428 
to  2-2449  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  aircraft  of  such  district  or  its  contractor 
to  fly  outside  the  boundaries  of  such  district  during  any  seeding  operations  or  to 
seed  any  cloud  formation  situated  outside  the  boundaries  of  such  district.  Any 
person,  partnership,  association,  or  corporation  violating  the  provisions  of  this 
section  shall,  upon  conviction  thereof,  be  fined  in  any  sum  not  to  exceed  five 
thousand  dollars. 

Source :  Laws  1959.  c.  9.  §  20,  p.  114. 

2-2JtJtl.  Weather  control  district;  dissolution  of  district;  election;  how  con- 
ducted; disposal  of  funds:  debts;  tax;  levy.  The  board  of  directors  may,  on  its 
own  motion,  or  the  board  shall,  on  a  written  request  signed  by  not  less  than 
twelve  resident  owners  of  land  in  each  of  a  majority  of  the  precincts  lying  wholly 
or  partly  within  the  district,  request  of  the  Secretary  of  State  that  the  question 
of  dissolution  of  such  district  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  electors,  as  set  forth  in 
sections  2-2428  to  2-2449.  of  the  district,  and  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  fix 
the  date  of  such  election,  notice  of  which  shall  be  given  and  which  shall  be  con- 
ducted in  the  same  manner  as  elections  for  the  formation  of  such  districts.  If  a 
majority  of  those  voting  on  such  question  vote  in  favor  of  dissolution,  the  Secre- 
tary of  State  shall  certify  such  result  to  the  board  of  directors  of  such  district.  If 
the  district  has  no  debts  outstanding  at  the  time  such  result  is  certified  to  the 
board  by  the  Secretary  of  State,  such  district  shall  thereupon  stand  dissolved. 
If  the  district  has  debts  outsanding  at  the  time  such  result  is  certified  to  the 
board  by  the  Secretary  of  State  and  there  are  not  sufficient  funds  in  the  hands  of 
the  treasurer  of  the  district  or  in  the  hands  of  the  county  treasurer  or  treasurers 
to  the  credit  of  the  district,  to  pay  such  debts,  or  if  at  the  time  of  such  certifica- 
tion, the  district  is  under  contract  for  any  program  of  weather  control  as  autho- 
rized herein,  the  board  of  directors  of  such  district  shall  have  authority  to:  (1) 
Levy  the  taxes  necessary  to  pay  such  outstanding  debts  ;  (2)  complete,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  contract,  any  program  of  weather  control,  or  in  the  alternative,  to 
negotiate  and  enter  into  a  settlement  of  such  contract  with  the  contractor  or  con- 
tractors ;  (3)  levy  the  taxes  necessary  to  pay  any  obligations  due  or  to  become  due 


564 


under  any  such  contract  for  any  such  program  of  weather  control  or  to  pay  the 
cost  of  settlement  thereof;  and  (4)  wind  up  the  affairs  of  the  district  and  levy 
the  taxes  necessary  to  pay  the  cost  thereof,  and  upon  payment  of  such  debts, 
the  completion  or  settlement  of  such  contract  or  contracts  for  any  such  program 
of  weather  control  and  the  payment  of  the  obligations  due  under  any  such  con- 
tract or  the  settlement  thereof,  and  the  payment  of  the  costs  incurred  in  winding 
up  the  affairs  of  the  district,  the  district  shall  thereupon  stand  dissolved.  In 
case  a  district  is  dissolved,  any  funds  on  hand  or  to  be  collected,  in  excess  of  the 
funds  necessary  to  pay  the  outstanding  obligations  of  the  district  and  the  costs 
of  winding  up  the  affairs  of  the  district,  shall  be  held  by  the  treasurer  of  the  dis- 
trict, and  the  directors  shall  petition  the  district  court  of  the  county  in  which 
the  main  office  is  located  for  an  order  approving  the  distribution  of  funds  to  the 
taxpayers  of  the  district  on  the  same  basis  as  collected.  The  question  of  dissolu- 
tion shall  not  be  submitted  more  often  than  once  every  twelve  months. 
Source :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  21,  p.  114. 

2-2448.  Weather  control  district;  act,  how  cited.  Sections  2-2428  to  2-2449  may 
be  cited  as  the  Weather  Control  Act  of  Nebraska. 
Source :  Laws  1959,  c.  9,  §  22,  p.  116. 

2-2449.  Weather  control  district;  formed  under  prior  act;  validation.  In  all 
cases  in  which  weather  control  districts  were  established  in  accordance  with  laws 
heretofore  existing,  all  acts  and  proceedings  taken  for  the  purpose  of  creating 
such  district  are  hereby  legalized,  validated,  and  declared  to  be  sufficient,  and 
such  weather  control  district  is  hereby  declared  to  be  duly  incorporated,  and  as 
such,  said  weather  control  district  under  its  corporate  name  shall  have  all  the 
rights  and  privileges  and  be  subject  to  all  of  the  duties  and  obligations  of  a  duly 
incorporated  weather  control  district. 

Source :  Laws  1959,  c.  9  §  23,  p.  116. 

Article  24 — Weather  Modification  Commission 
(a)  Weather  Modification  Commission 

Sec. 

2-2404.  Weather  Modification  Commission  ;  created  ;  membership  ;  appointment ;  term  ; 
no  salary  ;  expenses. 

2-2407.  Weather  control ;  artificial  precipitation  ;  application  ;  license  :  fees  :  payment 
to  State  Treasurer ;  credited  to  special  funds  and  accounts. 

2-2408.01.  Department  of  Agriculture  ;  authority  to  accept  funds  ;  purpose. 

2-2408.02.  State  Treasurer ;  custodian  of  weather  modification  funds  or  accounts ;  duties ; 
investment. 

(a)  Weather  Modification  Commission 

2-2404.  Weather  Modification  Commission;  created;  memdership;  appoint- 
ment; term;  no  salary;  expenses.  There  is  hereby  established  a  Weather  Modifi- 
cation Commission,  composed  of  the  Director  of  Agriculture,  the  Vice  Chancellor 
of  the  Institute  of  Agriculture  and  Natural  Resources  of  the  University  of  Ne- 
braska or  his  representative,  the  chairman  of  the  physics  department  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Nebraska,  and  four  additional  members,  interested  in  weather  modifi- 
cation, who  shall  be  appointed  annually  by  the  Governor  for  a  one-year  term 
commencing  January  1.  The  members  of  the  commission  shall  serve  without 
salary,  but  shall  be  reimbursed  for  their  actual  and  necessary  expenses  while 
in  the  performance  of  their  duties. 

Source :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  4,  p.  102 ;  Laws  1975,  LB  247,  §  1.  Effective  date 
August  24  1975. 

2-2407.  Weather  control;  artificial  precipitation;  application;  license;  fees; 
payment  to  State  Treasurer;  credited  to  special  funds  and  accounts.  (1)  Any 
person  desiring  to  cause  or  attempting  to  cause,  condensation  or  precipitation  of 
rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere,  or  who 
shall  prevent  or  attempt  to  prevent  by  artificial  means  the  natural  condensation 
or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the 
atmosphere,  shall  make  application  to  the  department  in  writing,  on  forms  sup- 
plied by  the  department,  to  do  so.  Each  application  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  fee 
of  fifty  dollars. 

(2)  Any  person  issued  a  license  to  do  any  of  the  acts  specified  in  subsection 
(1)  of  t  his  section  shall  pay  a  fee  of  two  hundred  dollars. 

(3)  No  fee  shall  be  cha  rged  for  experimental  or  research  work. 

(4)  The  money  collected  from  such  fees  shall  be  deposited  with  the  state  treas- 
ury and  by  the  State  Treasurer  credited  to  the  special  funds  and  accounts  estab- 
lished by  section  2-2408.02. 


565 


Source :  Laws  1957,  c.  7,  §  7,  p.  103 ;  Laws  1965,  c.  8,  §  6,  p.  91 ;  Laws  1975  LB  247, 
§  2.  Effective  date  August  24,  1975. 

2-2408.01.  Department  of  Agriculture;  authority  to  accept  funds;  purpose.  The 
department  may  accept  funds  or  fees  from  any  source,  federal,  state,  public  or 
private,  to  be  used  by  the  commission  in  the  performance  of  its  duties. 

Source :  Laws  1975,  LB  247,  §  3.  Effective  date  August  24,  1975. 

2-2408.02.  State  Treasurer;  custodian  of  weather  modification  funds  or  ac- 
counts; duties;  investment.  The  State  Treasurer  is  hereby  designated  as  the  cus- 
todian of  all  funds  or  fees  received  by  the  department  from  any  source,  federal, 
state,  public  or  private,  to  be  used  by  the  commission  in  the  performance  of  its 
duties.  The  State  Treasurer  is  authorized  to  receive  and  provide  for  the  proper 
custody  of  such  funds  or  fees  and  establish  such  special  weather  modification 
funds  and  accounts  as  may  be  necessary  to  carry  out  the  intent  and  purposes  of 
sections  2-2404  2-2407,  2-2408.01,  and  2-2408.02.  The  Director  of  Administrative 
Services  shall  draw  warrants  upon  such  funds  or  accounts  upon  presentation  of 
proper  vouchers  by  the  department.  Any  money  in  the  special  weather  modifica- 
tion funds  or  accounts  available  for  investment  shall  be  invested  by  the  state  in- 
vestment officer  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  Chapter  72,  article  12. 

Source  :  Laws  1975.  LB  247,  §  4.  Effective  date  August  24, 1975. 

81-82945.  State  Civil  Defense  Agency;  weather  condition;  continuously  ap- 
prise; permits;  issue;  suspend.  The  state  Civil  Defense  Agency  shall  keep  con- 
tinuously apprised  of  weather  conditions  which  present  danger  of  precipitation 
or  other  climatic  activity  severe  enough  to  constitute  a  disaster.  If  the  agency 
determines  that  precipitation  that  may  result  from  weather  modification  opera- 
tions, either  by  itself  or  in  conjunction  with  other  precipitation  or  climatic  con- 
ditions or  activity,  would  create  or  contribute  to  the  severity  of  a  disaster,  it  shall 
direct  the  officer  or  agency  empowered  to  issue  permits  for  weather  modification 
operations  to  suspend  the  issuance  of  the  permits,  and  thereupon  no  permits  may 
be  issued  until  the  agency  informs  the  officer  or  agency  that  the  danger  has 
passed. 

Source :  Laws  1973,  LB  494,  §  10.  Effective  date  May  12,  1973. 

Nevada 

Nev.  Rev.  Stat.  §§544.010-544.240;  244.190 

Chapter  544 — Weather  Modification 
Weather  Modification  Research  Law 

Sec. 

544.010  Short  title. 
544.020  Definitions. 

544.030    State  department  of  conservation  and  natural  resources  authorized  to  conduct 

research  programs. 
544.040    County  financial  participation  in  research  :  conditions. 

544.050  Agreements  between  counties  and  state  department  of  conservation  and  natural 
resources  ;  term  of  agreements. 

544.060  Utilization  of  facilities,  technical  resources  of  desert  research  institute,  Univer- 
sity of  Nevada  System. 

Regulations  of  Weather  Modification  Operations 

544.070  Definitions. 

544.080  Powers  of  the  director  of  the  state  department  of  conservation  and  natural 
resources. 

544.090    Promotion  of  research  and  development  activities  relating  to  weather  modification. 

544.100    Hearings  :  Record  of  proceedings  ;  examination  of  witnesses  ;  subpenas. 

544.110    Acceptance  of  gifts  and  grants  ;  weather  modification  fund. 

544.120    License  and.permit  required  for  weather  modification  and  control  activities. 

544.130    Exemptions  from  license,  permit  and  liability  requirements. 

544.140    Qualifications  of  licensees  ;  issuance,  renewal  of  licenses  ;  license  fee. 

544.150    Conditions  for  issuance  of  permits. 

544.160    Separate  permit  required  for  each  operation  ;  notice  of  intention  ;  conditions, 

modification  of  permit. 
544.170    Notice  of  intention  :  Contents. 

544. ISO    Notice  of  intention  :  Publication  ;  filing  of  proof  of  publication. 
544.190    Proof  of  financial  responsibility. 
544.200    Permit  fees. 

544.210    Records  and  reports  of  licensees,  exempt  organizations. 

544.220  Suspension,  revocation  of  licenses  and  permits :  Grounds ;  modification  of  permit 
terms. 

544.230    Construction  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive. 
544.240  Penalties. 

Weather  Modification  Research  Law 

5U.010  Short  title.  NRS  544.010  to  544.060,  inclusive,  may  be  cited  as  the 
Weather  Modification  Research  Law. 
(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  668) 


566 


544-020  Definitions.  As  used  in  NRS  544.010  to  544.060,  inclusive,  unless  the 
context  otherwise  requires : 

1.  "Department"  means  the  state  department  of  conservation  and  natural 
resources. 

2.  "Director"  means  the  director  of  the  state  department  of  conservation  and 
natural  resources. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  3981,  668) 

544-030  State  department  of  conservation  and  natural  resources  authorized  to 
conduct  research  programs.  The  department  may  conduct  weather  modification 
research  programs. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  668) 

544-040  County  financial  participation  in  research;  conditions.  In  areas  where 
weather  modification  research  is  to  be  carried  on,  the  counties  involved  may  give 
such  financial  assistance  as  the  director  and  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
shall  determine,  but  such  financial  assistance  shall  aggregate  for  the  counties 
involved  an  amount  not  less  than  25  percent  of  the  amount  paid  by  the  state  for 
such  program. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  668) 

544.050  Agreements  between  counties  and  state  department  of  conservation 
and  natural  resources ;  term  of  agreements.  Counties  in  cooperating  with  the 
director  in  conducting  any  weather  modification  program  in  fulfillment  of  the 
purposes  of  NRS  544.010  to  544.060,  inclusive,  are  authorized  to  enter  into  5-year 
agreements  with  the  director. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  669  ;  A  1975,  576) 

544.060  Utilization  of  facilities,  technical  resources  of  desert  research  institute, 
University  of  Nevada  System.  In  carrying  out  the  purposes  of  NRS  544.010  to 
544.060,  inclusive,  the  director  shall  utilize  to  the  fullest  possible  extent  the 
facilities  and  technical  resources  of  the  desert  research  institute  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Nevada  System. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  669  ;  A  1969, 1443) 

Regulations  of  Weather  Modification  Operations 

544-070  Definitions.  As  used  in  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive,  unless  the 
context  requires  otherwise : 

1.  "Director"  means  the  director  of  the  state  department  of  conservation  and 
natural  resources. 

2.  "Operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  pursuant  to  a  single  contract  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing, 
or  attempting  to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical 
area  over  one  continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  1  year,  or,  if  the  perform- 
ance of  weather  modification  and  control  activities  is  to  be  undertaken  individ- 
ually or  jointly  by  a  person  or  persons  to  be  benefited  and  not  undertaken  pur- 
suant to  a  contract,  "operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification 
and  control  ac  tivities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to 
produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one 
continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  1  year. 

3.  "Research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration  and 
experimentation  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and 
demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of 
models,  devices,  equipment,  materials  and  processes. 

4.  "Wheather  modification  and  control"  means  changing  or  controlling,  or 
attempting  to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods  the  natural  development 
of  any  or  all  atmospheric  cloud  forms  or  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in 
the  troposphere. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  691 ) 

5',',. 0R0  Povcrs  of  the  director  of  the  state  department  of  conservation  and 
natural  resources.  In  the  performance  of  his  functions  the  director  may,  in  addi- 
tion to  any  other  acts  authorized  by  law  : 

1.  Establish  advisory  committees  to  advise  with  and  make  recommendations 
to  the  director  concerning  legislation,  policies,  administration,  research  and  other 
matters. 

2.  Establish  by  regulation  or  order  such  standards  and  instructions  to  govern 
the  carrying  out  of  research  or  projects  in  weather  modification  and  control  as 
he  may  deem  necessary  or  desirable  to  minimize  danger  to  health  or  property, 


567 


and  make  such  regulations  as  are  necessary  in  the  performance  of  his  powers 
and  duties. 

3.  Make  such  studies,  investigations,  obtain  such  information  and  hold  such 
hearings  as  he  may  deem  necessary  or  proper  to  assist  him  in  exercising  his 
authority  or  in  the  administration  or  enforcement  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240, 
inclusive,  or  any  regulations  or  orders  issued  thereunder. 

4.  Appoint  and  lix  the  compensation  of  such  personnel,  without  compliance 
with  the  provisions  of  chapter  284  of  NRS,  including  specialists  and  consultants, 
as  are  necessary  to  perform  his  duties  and  functions. 

5.  Acquire,  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  such  materials,  equipment  and 
facilities  as  are  necessary  to  perform  his  duties  and  functions. 

6.  Cooperate  with  public  or  private  agencies  in  the  performance  of  his  func- 
tions or  duties  and  in  furtherance  of  the  purposes  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240, 
inclusive. 

7.  Represent  the  state  in  any  and  all  matters  pertaining  to  plans,  procedures 
or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  relating  to  weather  modification  and 
control. 

8.  With  approval  of  the  governor,  enter  into  cooperative  agreements  with  the 
various  counties  and  cities  of  this  state  or  with  any  private  or  public  agencies 
for  conducting  weather  modification  or  cloud  seeding  operations. 

9.  Act  for  and  represent  the  state  and  the  counties,  cities  and  private  or  public 
agencies  in  contracting  with  private  concerns  for  the  performance  of  weather 
modifications  or  cloud  seeding  operations. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  692) 

544-090  Promotion  of  research  and  development  activities  relating  to  iceathcr 
modification.  The  director  shall  exercise  his  powers  in  such  manner  as  to  pro- 
mote the  continued  conduct  of  research  and  deevlopment  activities  in  the  fields 
specified  below  by  private  or  public  institutions  or  persons  and  to  assist  in  the 
acquisition  of  an  expanding  fund  of  theoretical  and  practical  knowledge  in  such 
fields.  To  this  end  the  director  may  conduct,  and  make  arrangements  including 
contracts  and  agreements  for  the  conduct  of,  research  and  development  activ- 
ities relating  to : 

1.  The  theory  and  development  of  methods  of  weather  modification  and  con- 
trol, including  processes,  materials  and  devices  related  thereto. 

2.  Utilization  of  weather  modification  and  control  for  agricultural,  industrial, 
commercial  and  other  purposes. 

3.  The  protection  of  life  and  property  during  research  and  operational 
activities. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  693) 

544-100  Hearings:  Record  of  proceedings;  examination  of  witnesses;  sub- 
pcttas.  In  the  case  of  hearings  held  pursuant  to  NRS  544.220,  the  director  shall, 
and  in  other  cases  may,  cause  a  record  of  all  proceedings  to  be  taken  and  filed 
with  the  director,  together  with  his  findings  and  conclusions.  For  any  hearing, 
the  director  or  a  representative  designated  by  him  is  authorized  to  administer 
oaths  and  affirmations,  examine  witnesses  and  issue,  in  the  name  of  the  director, 
notice  of  the  hearing  or  subpenas  requiring  any  person  to  appear  and  testify, 
or  to  appear  and  produce  documents,  or  both,  at  any  designated  place. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  693) 

544110  Acceptance  of  gifts  and  grants ;  weather  modification  fund. 

1.  The  director  may,  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  imposed  by  law,  re- 
ceive and  accept  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  state  any  funds  which  may  be  offered 
or  become  available  from  federal  grants  or  appropriations,  private  gifts,  dona- 
tions or  bequests,  or  from  any  other  source,  and  may  expend  such  funds,  unless 
their  use  is  restricted  and  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  provided  by  law, 
for  the  administration  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive,  and  for  the  en- 
couragement of  research  and  development  by  a  state  or  public  or  private  agency, 
either  by  direct  grant,  by  contract  or  other  cooperative  means. 

2.  There  is  hereby  established  a  continuing  fund  in  the  general  fund  in  the 
state  treasury  to  be  known  as  the  weather  modification  fund.  All  license  and 
permit  fees  paid  to  the  director  shall  be  deposited  in  such  fund.  Any  accumula- 
tion in  such  fund  in  excess  of  $5,000  shall  revert  immediately  to  the  general 
fund. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  693) 

544-120  License  and  permit  required  for  weather  modification  and  control 
activities.  Except  as  provided  in  NRS  544.130,  no  person  shall  engage  in  activ- 


568 


ities  for  weather  modification  and  control  except  under  and  in  accordance  with 
a  license 'and  a  permit  issued  by  the  director  authorizing  such  activities. 
(Add  to  NRS  by  1961,  693) 

5JfJf.l30  Exemptions  from  license,  permit  and  liability  requirements.  The 
director,  to  the  extent  he  deems  practical,  shall  provide  by  regulation  for  exempt- 
ing from  the  license,  permit  and  liability  requirements  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240, 
inclusive : 

1.  Research  and  development  and  experiments  by  state  and  federal  agencies, 
institutions  of  higher  learning  and  bona  fide  nonprofit  research  organizations. 

2.  Laboratory  research  and  experiments. 

3.  Activities  required  in  emergencies  for  protection  against  fire,  frost,  sleet 
or  fog. 

4.  Activities  normally  engaged  in  for  purposes  other  than  those  of  inducing, 
increasing,  decreasing  or  preventing  precipitation  or  hail. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  693  ;  A  1967,  159) 

5^.1JfO  Qualifications  of  licensees;  issuance,  renewal  of  licenses;  license  fee. 
1.  Licenses  to  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control  shall  be 
issued  to  applicants  therefor  who  pay  the  license  fee  required  and  who  demon- 
strate, to  the  satisfaction  of  the  director,  competence  in  the  field  of  meteorology 
reasonably  necessary  to  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  con- 
trol. If  the  applicant  is  an  organization,  these  requirements  shall  be  met  by  the 
individual  or  individuals  who  are  to  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  the  operation 
for  the  applicant. 

2.  The  director  shall  issue  licenses  in  accordance  with  such  procedures  and 
subject  to  such  conditions  as  he  may  by  regulation  establish  to  effectuate  the 
provisions  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive.  Each  license  shall  be  issued 
for  a  period  to  expire  at  the  end  of  the  calendar  year  in  which  it  is  issued  and, 
if  the  licensee  possesses  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  a  new 
license,  such  license  shall  upon  application  be  renewed  at  the  expiration  of  such 
period.  A  license  shall  be  issued  or  renewed  only  upon  the  payment  to  the  direc- 
tor of  $100  for  the  license  or  renewal  thereof. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  694) 

o'f-'{.150.  Conditions  for  issuance  of  permits.  The  director  shall  issue  permits 
in  accordance  with  such  procedures  and  subject  to  such  conditions  as  he  may 
by  regulation  establish  to  effectuate  the  provisions  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240, 
inclusive,  only : 

1.  If  the  applicant  is  licensed  pursuant  to  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive. 

2.  If  a  sufficient  notice  of  intention  is  published  and  proof  of  publication  is 
filed  as  required  by  NRS  544.180. 

3.  If  the  applicant  furnishes  proof  of  financial  responsibility,  as  provided  in 
NRS  544.190,  in  an  amount  as  may  be  determined  by  the  director  but  not  to 
exceed  $20,000. 

4.  If  the  fee  for  a  permit  is  paid  as  required  by  NRS  544.200. 
(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  694) 

5M.160.  Separate  permit  required  for  each  operation;  notice  of  intention;  con- 
dition,  modification  of  permit.  A  separate  permit  shall  be  issued  for  each  opera- 
tion. Prior  to  undertaking  any  weather  modification  and  control  activities  the 
licensee  shall  file  with  the  director  and  also  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of 
intention.  The  licensee,  if  a  permit  is  issued,  shall  confine  his  activities  for  the 
permitted  operation  substantially  within  the  time  and  area  limits  set  forth  in 
the  notice  of  intention,  unless  modified  by  the  director,  and  his  activities  shall 
also  substantially  conform  to  any  conditions  imposed  by  the  director  upon  the 
issuance  of  the  permit  or  to  the  terms  of  the  permit  as  modified  after  issuance. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  694) 

.-,',',.170. — Notice  of  intention:  Contents.  The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth 
at  least  all  the  following : 

1.  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee. 

2.  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or  orga- 
nization on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted. 

3.  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  opera- 
tion will  be  conducted. 

4.  The  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation. 

5.  The  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation. 
(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  694) 

5  '/  ',.180.  Notice  of  intention:  Publication;  filing  of  proof  of  publication.  1.  The 
applicant  shall  cause  the  notice  of  intention,  or  that  portion  thereof  including 


569 


the  items  specified  in  NRS  544.170,  to  be  published  at  least  once  a  week  for  3 
consecutive  weeks  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  published 
within  any  county  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  which  the 
affected  area  is  located,  or,  if  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in  more  than  one 
county  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one  county  or  is  located 
in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted,  then 
in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  published  within  each  of  such 
counties.  In  case  there  is  no  newspaper  published  within  the  appropriate  county, 
publication  shall  be  made  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  within 
the  county. 

2.  Proof  of  publication,  made  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  shall  be  filed  by 
the  Licensee  with  the  director  within  15  days  from  the  date  of  the  last  publication 
of  the  notice. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  695) 

544-190  Proof  of  financial  responsibility.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  may 
be  furnished  by  an  applicant  by  his  showing,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  director, 
his  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for  liability  which  might  reasonably  be  at- 
tached to  or  result  from  his  weather  modification  and  control  activities  in  con- 
nection with  the  operation  for  which  he  seeks  a  permit ;  but  the  applicant  need 
not  show  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for  liability  resulting  from  precipitation 
caused  by  weather  modification  experiments. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  695  ;  A  1967,  159) 

544-200  Permit  fees.  The  fee  to  be  paid  by  each  applicant  for  a  permit  shall 
be  equivalent  to  l1^  percent  of  the  estimated  cost  of  such  operation,  such  cost 
to  be  estimated  by  the  director  from  the  evidence  available  to  him.  The  fee  is 
due  and  payable  to  the  director  as  of  the  date  of  the  issuance  of  the  permit,  but 
if  the  applicant  is  able  to  give  to  the  director  satisfactory  security  for  the  pay- 
ment of  the  balance,  he  may  be  permitted  to  commence  the  operation,  and  a 
permit  may  be  issued  therefor,  upon  the  payment  of  not  less  than  50  percent 
of  the  fee.  The  balance  due  shall  be  paid  within  3  months  from  the  date  of  the 
termination  of  the  operation  as  prescribed  in  the  permit.  Failure  to  pay  a  permit 
fee  as  required  is  grounds  for  suspension  or  revocation  of  the  license  of  the 
delinquent  permitholder  and  grounds  for  refusal  to  renew  his  license  or  to  issue 
any  further  permits  to  such  person. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  695) 

544-210  Records  and  reports  of  licensees,  exempt  organizations.  1.  Each  li- 
censee shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  conducted  by  him  pursu- 
ant to  his  license  and  each  permit,  showing  the  method  employed,  the  type  of 
equipment  used,  materials  and  amounts  thereof  used,  the  times  and  places  of  oper- 
ation of  the  equipment,  the  name  and  post  office  address  of  each  individual  par- 
ticipating or  assisting  in  the  operation  other  than  the  licensee,  and  such  other 
general  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  director,  and  shall  report  the 
same  to  the  director  at  the  time  and  in  the  manner  required  by  the  director. 

2.  The  director  shall  require  written  reports  in  such  manner  as  he  provides 
but  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive, 
covering  each  operation  for  which  a  permit  is  issued.  The  director  shall  also 
require  written  reports  from  such  organizations  as  are  exempt  from  the  license, 
permit  and  liability  provisions  of  NRS  544.130. 

3.  All  information  on  an  operation  shall  be  submitted  to  the  director  before 
any  information  on  such  operation  may  be  released  to  the  public. 

4.  The  reports  and  records  in  the  custody  of  the  director  shall  be  open  for 
public  examination. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  695) 

544-220  Suspension,  revocation  of  licenses  and  permits:  Grounds;  modification 
of  permit  terms.  1.  The  director  may  suspend  or  revoke  any  license  or  permit 
issued  if  it  appears  that  the  licensee  no  longer  possesses  the  qualifications  neces- 
sary for  the  issuance  of  a  new  license  or  permit.  The  director  may  suspend  or 
revoke  any  license  or  permit  if  it  appears  that  the  licensee  has  violated  any  of 
the  provisions  of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive.  Such  suspension  or  revoca- 
tion shall  occur  only  after  notice  to  the  licensee  and  a  reasonable  opportunity 
granted  such  licensee  to  be  heard  respecting  the  grounds  for  the  proposed  sus- 
pension or  revocation.  The  director  may  refuse  to  renew  the  license  of,  or  to 
issue  another  permit  to,  any  applicant  who  has  failed  to  comply  with  any  pro- 
visions of  NRS  544.070  to  544.240,  inclusive. 

2.  The  director  may  modify  the  terms  of  a  permit  after  issuance  thereof  if 
the  licensee  is  first  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a  hearing 


570 


respecting  the  grounds  for  the  proposed  modification  and  if  it  appears  fo  the 
director,  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  health  or  the  property  of 
any  person  to  make  the  modification  proposed. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1961,  696) 
■  5.',Jh230  Construction  of  NRS  5Jf'h070  to  5U.2IfO,  inclusive.  Nothing  in  NRS 
544.070  to  54 4. 240,  inclusive,  shall  be  construed  to  impose  or  accept  any  liability 
or  responsibility  on  the  part  of  the  state  or  any  state  officials  or  employees  for 
any  weather  modification  and  control  activities  of  any  private  person  or  group, 
or  to  affect  in  any  way  any  contractual,  tortious  or  other  legal  rights,  duties  or 
liabilities  between  any  private  persons  or  groups. 

'  Added  to  NRS  by  1961.  696) 

544.240  Penalties.  Any  person  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  NRS  544.070 
to  544.2-JO.  inclusive,  or  any  lawful  regulation  or  order  issued  pursuant  thereto 
shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  a  continuing  violation  is  punishable  as  a 
separate  offense  for  each  dav  during  which  it  occurs. 

( Added  to  NRS  by  1961.  696) 

244-181  Franchises  for  garbage  collection,  disposal  services;  fire  protection, 
suppression  :  ambulance  service.  1.  Any  board  of  county  commissioners  may  grant 
exclusive  franchises  to  operate  any  of  the  following  services  outside  the  limits 
of  incorporated  cities  within  the  county : 

I  a )  Garbage  and  disposal. 

(b)  Fire  protection  and  suppression. 

(c)  Ambulance  service  to  pick  up  patients  outside  the  limits  of  such  incorpo- 
rated cities. 

2.  Nothing  in  paragraph  (c)  of  subsection  1  shall  prevent  any  ambulance 
service  from  transporting  patients  from  any  county  in  which  it  is  franchisee! 
to  another  county. 

3.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  may,  by  ordinance,  regulate  such  services 
and  fix  fees  or  rates  to  be  charged  by  the  franchise  holder. 

4.  A  notice  of  the  intention  to  grant  any  franchise  shall  be  published  once  in  a 
newspaper  of  general  circulation  in  the  county,  and  the  franchise  may  not  be 
granted  until  30  days  after  such  publication.  The  board  of  county  commissioners 
shall  give  full  consideration  to  any  application  or  bid  to  supply  such  services,  if 
received  prior  to  the  expiration  of  such  30-day  period,  and  shall  grant  the  fran- 
chise on  terms  most  advantageous  to  the  county  and  the  persons  to  be  served. 

5.  The  provisions  of  chapter  709  of  NRS  shall  not  apply  to  any  franchise  granted 
under  the  provisions  of  this  section. 

ti.  Nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  any  individual,  partner- 
ship, corporation  or  association  from  hauling  his  or  its  own  garbage  subject  to 
the  regulations  of  the  board  of  county  commissioners  promulgated  under  the  pro- 
visions of  this  section. 

1  Added  to  NRS  by  1960.  433  :  A  1971, 1372  ;  1975,  569) 

.J  'j'f.190  Weather  modification  cooperative  agreements.  1.  The  boards  of  county 
commissioners  of  the  various  counties  are  empowered  to  enter  into  cooperative 
agreements  with  the  State  of  Nevada,  other  counties  of  this  state,  or  any  private 
or  public  organization,  and  with  private  concerns  engaged  in  weather  modification 
(cloud  seeding)  operations. 

2.  The  expenses  incident  and  necessary  for  the  participation  of  counties  in  such 
cooperative  program,  as  provided  in  subsection  1,  shall  be  paid  out  of  the  general 
funds  of  such  counties,  and  the  board  of  county  commissioners  of  any  county  act- 
ing under  the  terms  of  this  section  shall  annually,  at  the  time  of  making  its 
budget,  make  an  estimate  of  the  expenses  necessary  to  carry  out  its  agreement, 
under  the  provisions  of  this  section,  and  budget  the  same,  in  all  respects,  as  other 
items  of  the  budget  may  be  made. 

3.  All  agreements  for  cooperation  between  the  State  of  Nevada  and  the  counties, 
and  with  any  private  organization  as  set  forth  in  subsection  1,  shall  be  evidenced 
bv  written  agreements  made  and  entered  into  by  the  boards  of  county  commis- 
sioners interested,  and  the  same  shall  be  spread  upon  the  minutes  of  each  of  the 
boards  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  thereof. 

4.  All  action  taken  and  all  proceedings  adopted  prior  to  March  2,  1955,  by  the 
boards  of  county  commissioners  of  Pershing,  Lander,  Eureka,  Humboldt.  Elko 
and  While  Pine  counties,  relating  to  weather  modification  (cloud  seeding),  are 
ratified,  approved  and  confirmed. 

[  1 :26  :1955]-K2  :2G  :1955]  +  [3  :26  :1955]  +  [4  :26  :1955] 

%44'Wh  VQtyng  machines:  Rental,  lease,  acquisition.  Boards  of  county  commis- 


571 


sioners  may  rent,  lease  or  otherwise  acquire  voting  machines  in  whatever  manner 
will  best  serve  local  interests. 

(Added  to  NRS  by  1965,  615 ;  A  1975,  570) 

244.195  Other  powers.  The  boards  of  county  commissioners  shall  have  power 
and  jurisdiction  in  their  respective  counties  to  do  and  perform  all  such  other  acts 
and  things  as  may  be  lawful  and  strictly  necessary  to  the  full  discharge  of  the 
powers  and  jurisdiction  conferred  on  the  board. 

[Part  8  :80  :1865  ;  A  1871,  47  ;  1931,  52 ;  1933,  203  ;  1953,  681] 

New  Hampshire 

NJL  Rev.  Stat.  Ann.  §432:1 

Weather  Modification  Experimentation 

432:1  Weather  Modification  Experimentation.  Any  department  or  agency  of  the 
state  may,  with  the  approval  of  the  governor  and  council  and  within  the  limits  of 
appropriated  funds  or  by  means  of  gifts,  donations  or  grants,  engage  in  and  under- 
take experimentation  in  the  techniques  and  methods  for  weather  modification, 
and  may  cooperate  therein  with  the  federal  government,  with  authorized  agencies 
of  other  states,  and  with  interested  persons  and  organizations. 

New  Mexico 
N.M.  Stat.  Ann.  §§  75-37-1-75-31-15 

Article  37 — Weather  Control  and  Cloud  Modification 

Sec. 

75-37-1.  Short  title. 
73-37-2.  Definitions. 
75-37-3.    Declaration  of  rights. 

75-37-4.    Attempt  to  control  precipitation — License  required. 
75-37-5.    Application  for  license. 

75-37-6.    Application  for  license — Contents — Annual  license  fee — Statement. 

75-37-7.    Issuance  of  license. 

75—37—8.    License  fee — Expiration. 

75-37-9.    Reports  required  from  licensees. 

75-37-10.  Revocation  of  license. 

75-37—11.  Judicial  review. 

75-37-12.  Operations  affecting  weather  in  other  states. 
75-37-13.  Enforcement. 

75-37-14.  Powers  and  duties  of  commission. 
75-37-15.  Violations  of  act — Penalty. 

75-37-1.  Short  title.— This  act  [75-37-1  to  75-37-15]  may  be  cited  as  the  "Wea- 
ther Control  Act." 

75-37-2.  Definitions. — As  used  in  the  Weather  Control  Act  [75-37-1  to  75-37- 
15]  "commission"  means  the  weather  control  and  cloud  modification  commission. 
History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  2. 

75-37-3.  Declaration  of  rights. — It  is  declared  that  the  state  of  New  Mexico 
claims  the  right  to  all  moisture  in  the  atmosphere  which  would  fall  so  as  to  be- 
come a  part  of  the  natural  streams  or  percolated  water  of  New  Mexico,  for  use 
in  accordance  with  its  laws. 

75-37-4.  Attempt  to  control  precipitation — License  required. — No  person  or  cor- 
poration shall,  without  having  first  received  a  license  from  the  commission,  con- 
duct any  weather  control  or  cloud  modification  operations  or  attempt  to  control 
precipitation. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  4. 

75-37-5.  Application  for  license. — Any  individual  or  corporation  who  proposes 
to  operate  weather  control  or  cloud  modification  projects  or  who  attempts  to  induce 
precipitation,  shall,  before  engaging  in  any  such  operation,  make  application  to 
the  commission  for  a  license  to  engage  in  the  particular  weather  control  or  cloud 
modification  operation  contemplated. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  5. 

75-37-6.  Application  for  license — Contents — Annual  license  fee — Statement. — 
At  the  time  of  applying  for  the  license,  the  applicant  shall  pay  to  the  commission  a 
fee  of  one  hundred  dollars  ($100),  and  shall  file  an  application  in  the  form  pre- 
scribed by  the  commission  which  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  statement  showing: 

A.  The  name  and  address  of  the  applicant ; 

B.  The  names  of  the  operating  personnel,  and,  if  unincorporated,  all  individ- 
uals connected  with  the  organization,  or,  if  a  corporation,  the  names  of  each  of  the 
officers  and  directors  thereof,  together  with  the  address  of  each  : 

C.  The  scientific  qualifications  of  all  operating  and  supervising  personnel ; 


572 


T>.  A  statement  of  all  other  contracts  completed  or  in  process  of  completion  at 
the  time  the  application  is  made,  giving  the  names  and  addresses  of  the  persons 
to  whom  the  services  were  furnished  and  the  areas  in  which  such  operations  have 
been  or  are  being  conducted  ; 

E.  The  objective  of  the  operation,  methods  of  operation  the  licensee  will  use, 
and  the  description  of  the  aircraft,  ground  and  meteorological  services  to  be  used ; 

!F.  Names  of  the  contracting  parties  within  the  state ;  including  : 
(1)  the  area  to  be  served ; 

'(2)  the  months  in  which  operations  will  be  conducted  ; 
(3)  the  methods  to  be  used  in  evaluating  the  operation  ;  and 
G.  Any  other  information  the  commission  deems  necessary. 
'History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  6. 

75-37-7.  Issuance  of  license. — The  commission  may  issue  a  license  to  any 
applicant  who  demonstrates  sufficient  financial  responsibility,  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  board,  necessary  to  meet  obligations  reasonably  likely  to  be  attached  to  or 
result  from  weather  control  or  cloud  modification  activities,  and  skill  and  ex- 
perience reasonably  necessary  to  accomplishment  of  weather  control  without 
actionable  injury  to  property  or  person. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  7. 

15-31-S.  License  fee — Expiration. — A  license  shall  expire  at  the  end  of  the 
calendar  year  in  which  it  is  issued  and  may  be  renewed  upon  payment  of  the 
annual  license  fee. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  8. 

15-31-9.  Reports  required  from  licenses. — lEach  licensee  shall,  within  ninety 
[90]  days  after  conclusion  of  any  weather  control  or  cloud  modification  project, 
file  with  the  commission  a  final  evaluation  of  the  project.  Each  three  [3]  months, 
during  the  operation  of  any  project  which  has  not  been  completed,  each  licensee 
shall  file  a  report  evaluating  the  operations  for  the  preceding  three  [3]  months  in 
the  project.  Failure  to  file  such  reports  constitute [s]  grounds  for  immediate  revo- 
cation of  the  license.  Each  evaluation  report  shall  contain  such  information  as 
required  by  the  commission  in  order  to  aid  in  research  and  development  in  weather 
modification  and  to  aid  in  the  protection  of  life  and  property. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  9. 

15-31-10.  Revocaton  of  license. — The  commission  shall  revoke  any  license  if 
it  shall  appear  that  the  licensee  no  longer  possesses  the  qualifications  necessary 
for  the  issuance  of  a  new  license,  or  is  guilty  of  a  violation  of  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Weather  Control  Act  [75-37-1  to  75-37-15].  Such  revocation  shall 
occur  only  after  notice  to  the  licensee,  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  has  been 
granted  the  licensee  to  be  heard  respecting  the  grounds  of  the  proposed  revocation. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  10. 

15-31-11.  Judicial  review. — Rulings  by  the  commission  on  the  issuance,  re- 
fusal or  revocation  of  a  license  are  subject  to  review  only  in  the  district  court 
for  Santa  Fe  Countv  and  the  state  Supreme  Court. 

History :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  11. 

15-31-12.  Operations  affecting  weather  in  other  states. — Weather  control  or 
cloud  modification  operations  may  not  be  carried  on  in  New  Mexico  for  the  pur- 
pose of  affecting  weather  in  any  other  state  which  prohibits  such  operations,  or 
which  prohibits  operations  in  that  state  for  the  benefit  of  New  Mexico  or  its  in- 
habitants. 

iHistory :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  12. 

15-31-13.  Enforcement. — Enforcement  of  the  Weather  Control  Act  T 75-37-1 
to  75-37-15]  is  vested  in  the  board  of  regents  of  New  Mexico  Institute  of  Mining 
and  Technology.  The  board  of  regents  shall  appoint  a  three-member  weather  con- 
trol and  cloud  modification  commission  for  the  purpose  of  administering  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Weather  Control  Act.  Technical  assistance,  research,  evaluation, 
and  advice  to  the  commission  shall  be  furnished  by  the  institute  at  the  direction 
of  the  board  of  rodents.  The  commission  shall  elect  from  among  its  members  a 
chairman  and  other  officers  it  dooms  nooessnry.  All  fees  collected  by  the  commis- 
sion shall  be  placed  in  a  fund  to  be  used  by  the  commission  for  the  purposes  of 
ca  rrving  out  the  provisions  of  the  Weather  Control  Act. 

History  :  Laws  1965.  ch.  235.  §  13. 

7.r>~31-1/t.    Powers  and  duties  of  commission. — The  commision  may: 

A.  Make  nil  rules  and  regulations  necessary  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  the 
Weather  Control  Act  T75-37-1  to  75-37-15]  ; 

B.  Make  any  Held  investigations  and  inspections  necessary  to  the  enforcement 
of  the  Weather  Control  Act ; 


573 

C.  Make  periodic  reports  on  weather  control  and  cloud  modification  activities 
in  this  state  together  with  evaluations  of  the  results  of  such  activities ;  and 

D.  Make  recommendations  to  the  legislature  through  the  board  of  regent*  on 
needed  legislation  in  the  regard  to  weather  control  and  cloud  modification. 

History  :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  14. 

75-37-15.  Violations  of  act — Penalty. — Any  person  conducting  weather  con- 
trol or  cloud  modification  operations  without  first  having  procured  a  license,  or 
who  makes  a  false  statement  in  the  application  for  a  license,  or  who  fails  to  file 
any  report  or  evaluation  required  by  the  Weather  Control  Act  [75-37-1  to  75-37- 
15],  or  who  conducts  any  weather  control  or  cloud  modification  operation  after 
revocation  of  his  license,  or  who  violates  any  provision  of  the  Weather  Control  Act 
is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor. 

History :  Laws  1965,  ch.  235,  §  15. 

New  York 

N.Y.  Gen.  Mun.  Law  Law  §  119-p 

Article  5-H — Projects  Relating  to  the  Use  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources- 

[New] 

See. 

119 — p.  Projects  relating  to  the  use  of  atmospheric  water  resources. 
Article  added  L.1965,  c.  661,  eff.  July  2,  1965. 

§  119-p.  Projects  relating  to  the  use  of  atmospheric  water  resources 

Every  municipal  corporation  is,  and  any  two  or  more  municipal  corporations 
are,  hereby  authorized  and  empowered  to  conduct  or  engage  in  projects,  experi- 
ments and  other  activities  designed  to  develop  the  use  of  atmospheric  water  re- 
sources, and  to  make  scientific  evaluations  of  such  projects,  experiments  and 
other  activities,  or  to  contract  therefor,  and  to  appropriate  and  expend  moneys 
therefor.  In  the  case  of  a  joint  project  by  two  or  more  municipal  corporations, 
the  share  of  the  cost  of  such  project  or  activity  to  be  borne  by  each  such  munic- 
ipal corporation  shall  be  fixed  by  contract.  The  expenditure  of  moneys  for  such 
purpose  by  a  municipal  corporation  shall  be  deemed  a  lawful  municipal  purpose 
and  the  moneys  appropriated  therefor  shall  be  raised  by  tax  upon  the  taxable  real 
property  within  the  municipal  corporation  in  the  same  manner  as  moneys  for 
other  lawful  municipal  purposes.  Each  municipal  corporation  is  hereby  author- 
ized to  accept  and  disburse  grants  of  public  or  private  money  or  other  aid  paid 
or  made  available  by  the  state  or  federal  government  for  any  such  purpose. 
Added  L.1965,  c.  661,  eff.  July  2, 1965. 

North  Dakota 

N.D.  Cent.  Code  §§  2-07-01—2-07-13;  37-17.1-15;  58-03-07 

Chapter  2-07 — Weather  Modification 

Sec. 

2-07-01       Ownership  of  water 

2-07-01.1    Declaration  of  policy  and  purpose. 

2-07-02  Definitions. 

2-07-02.1    North  Dakota  weather  modification  board — Created — Membership. 
2-97-02.2    Weather  modification  board — Districts  created. 

2-07-02.3    Direction  and  supervision  by  aeronautics  commission — Independent  functions 

retained  by  board. 
2-07-02.4    Weather  modification  board — Officers — Compensation. 
2-07-02.5    Powers  and  duties  of  weather  modification  board. 
2-07-03       License  and  permit  required. 
2-07-03.1  Exemptions. 

2-07-03.2    Operator  deemed  to  be  doing  business  within  state — Resident  agent. 
2-07-03.3    Issuance  of  license — Fee. 
2—07—03.4    Revocation  or  suspension  of  license. 
2-07-04      Permit  required — Issuance  of  permit — Fee. 
2-07-04.1  Hearings. 

2-07-04.2    Revocation,  suspension,  or  modification  of  permit. 
2^07-04.3    Proof  of  financial  responsibility. 

2-07-05      Board   may   create  operating  districts — Representation   of  noncontracting 
counties. 

2-07-05.1    District  operations  advisory  committees  created — Duties. 
2t-07-05.2    Weather  modification  authority  may  suspend  operations. 
2-07-06       Weather  modification  authority  created  by  petition. 
2-07-06.1    Petition  contents. 


34-857—79  39 


574 


Sec. 

2-07-06.2  Commissioners — Compensation — Meetings — Officers. 

2-07-06.3  Tax  levy  may  be  certified  by  weather  modification  authority. 

2-07-06.4:  Creation  of  weather  modification  authority  and  its  powers  by  resolution. 

2-07-06.5  Procedure  for  abolishment  of  weather  modification  authority  and  all  its  powers 

by  recall  initiated  petition. 

2-07-06.6  Creation  of  weather  modification  authority  by  election. 

2  07-06.7  Abolishment  of  weather  modification  authority  by  election. 

2-07-06.8  Creation  of  weather  modification  authority  by  vote  after  resolution  of  county 
commissioners. 

2-07-07  County  budget  may  be  waived  for  first  appropriation — Conditions. 

2-07-08  Bids  required — When. 

2-07-09  Performance  bond  required. 

2-07-09.1  Bid  bond  required. 

2-07-10  State  immunity. 

2-07-10.1  Liability  of  controller. 

2-07-11  Weather  modification  board  may  receive  and  expend  funds. 

2-07-11.1  County  appropriations — State  to  provide  matching  funds. 

2  07-12  Aeronautics  commission — Compensation — Expenses. 

2-07-13  Penalty. 


5S-03-07.  Powers  of  electors. — The  electors  of  each  township  have  the  power 
at  the  annual  township  meeting: 

1.  To  establish  one  or  more  pounds  within  the  township,  to  determine  the  lo- 
cation of  the  pounds,  to  determine  the  number  of  poundmasters  and  to  choose 
the  poundmasters,  and  to  discontinue  pounds  which  have  been  established ; 

2.  To  select  the  township  officers  required  to  be  chosen  ; 

3.  To  direct  the  institution  or  defense  of  actions  in  all  controversies  where  the 
township  is  interested ; 

4.  To  direct  the  raising  of  such  sums  of  as  they  may  deem  necessary  to  prose- 
cute or  defend  actions  in  which  the  township  is  interested  ; 

5.  To  make  all  rules  and  regulations  for  the  impounding  of  animals ; 

6.  To  make  such  bylaws,  rules,  and  regulations  as  may  be  deemed  necessary 
to  carry  into  effect  the  powers  granted  to  the  township ; 

7.  To  impose  penalties  not  exceeding  ten  dollars  for  each  offense  on  persons 
offending  against  any  rule  or  regulation  established  by  the  township ; 

8.  To  apply  penalties  when  collected  in  such  manner  as  they  deem  most  con- 
ducive to  the  interests  of  the  township  ; 

0.  To  ratify  or  reject  recommendations  offered  by  the  board  of  township  su- 
pervisors for  the  expenditure  of  funds  for  the  purpose  of  purchasing  building 
sites  and  for  the  purchase,  location,  erection,  or  removal  of  any  building  or  erec- 
tion for  township  purposes.  No  recommendation  shall  be  adopted  except  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote  of  the  electors  present  and  voting  at  any  annual  township  meeting ; 

10.  To  authorize  and  empower  the  board  of  township  supervisors  to  purchase 
liquids,  compounds,  or  other  ingredients  for  the  destruction  of  noxious  weeds, 
and  sprinklers  to  be  used  in  spraying  said  liquids  or  compounds.  No  township 
shall  purchase  more  than  two  such  sprinklers  in  any  one  year ; 

11.  Repealed  by  S.L.  1949,  ch.  343,  §  1 ; 

12.  To  authorize  aid  to  a  district  fair  association  within  the  limits  provided 
in  title  4,  Agriculture ; 

13.  To  authorize  the  levy  of  township  taxes  for  the  repair  and  construction  of 
roads  and  bridges  and  for  other  township  charges  and  expenses  within  the  limits 
lii-escribed  in  title  57,  Taxation; 

14.  To  direct  the  expenditure  of  funds  raised  for  the  repair  and  construction 
of  roads  within  the  limits  provided  in  title  24,  Highways,  Bridges,  and  Ferries ; 

To  authorize  the  dissolution  of  the  township  in  the  manner  provided  in 
this  title; 

16.  To  authorize  the  purchase  and  maintenance  of  dipping  tanks  as  provided  in 
title  30,*  Livestock ; 

17.  To  authorize  (he  purchase  of  township  firefighting  equipment  in  the  man- 
ner  provided  in  title  18.**  Fires;  and  to  authorize  the  entering  into  a  contract 
for  Are  protection  as  provided  for  in  section  18-00-10;  and 

15.  To  establish  a  fund  for  the  eradication  of  gophers,  prairie  dogs,  crows,  and 
magpies. 

L9.  To  authorize  the  expenditure  of  township  funds  for  weather  modification 
activities. 

97  17:1-/5.  Weather  modification. — The  division  of  disaster  emergency  services 
shall  keep  continuously  apprised  of  weather  conditions  which  present  danger  of 
precipitation  pr  other  climatic  activity  severe  enough  to  constitute  a  disaster.  If 
flic  division  determines  that  precipitation  that  may  result  from  weather  inoditi- 
cation  operations,  either  by  itself  or  in  conjunction  with  other  precipitation  or 
climatic  conditions  or  activity,  would  create  or  contribute  to  the  severity  of  a 


575 


disaster,  it  shall  direct  the  officer  or  agency  empowered  to  issue  permits  for 
weather  modification  operations  to  suspend  the  issuance  of  the  permits.  There- 
upon, no  permits  may  be  issued  until  the  division  informs  the  officer  or  agency 
that  the  danger  has  passed. 

Source :  S.  L.  1973.  ch.  281,  §  15. 

2-07-01.  Ownership  of  ivater. — In  order  that  the  state  may  share  to  the  fullest 
extent  in  the  benefits  already  gained  through  fundamental  research  and  investi- 
gation on  new  and  improved  means  for  predicting,  influencing,  and  controlling 
the  weather,  for  the  best  interest,  general  welfare,  health,  and  safety  of  all  the 
people  of  the  state,  and  to  provide  proper  safeguards  in  applying  the  measures 
for  use  in  connection  therewith  in  order  to  protect  life  and  property,  it  is  deemed 
necessary  and  hereby  declared  that  the  state  of  North  Dakota  claims  its  sovereign 
right  to  use  the  moisture  contained  in  the  clouds  and  atmosphere  within  the 
sovereign  state  boundaries.  All  water  derived  as  a  result  of  weather  modification 
operations  shall  be  considered  a  part  of  North  Dakota's  basic  water  supply  and 
all  statutes,  rules,  and  regulations  applying  to  natural  precipitation  shall  also 
apply  to  precipitation  resulting  from  cloud  seeding. 

Source :  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  1 ;  1975,  ch.  50,  §  L 

2-07-01.1.  Declaration  of  policy  and  purpose. — The  legislative  assembly  finds 
that  weather  modification  affects  the  public  health,  safety,  and  welfare,  and  that, 
properly  conducted,  weather  modification  operations  can  improve  water  quality 
and  quantity,  reduce  losses  from  weather  hazards,  and  provide  economic  benefits 
for  the  people  of  the  state.  Therefore,  in  the  public  interest,  weather  modification 
shall  be  subject  to  regulation  and  control,  and  research  and  development  shall  be 
encouraged.  In  order  to  minimize  possible  adverse  effects,  weather  modification 
operations  shall  be  carried  on  with  proper  safeguards,  and  accurate  information 
shall  be  recorded  concerning  such  operations  and  the  benefits  obtained  therefrom 
by  the  people  of  the  state. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  2. 

2-07-02.  Definitions. — As  used  herein,  unless  the  context  or  subject  matter 
otherwise  requires : 

1.  "Weather  modification"  means  and  extends  to  the  control,  alteration, 
amelioration  of  weather  elements  including  man-caused  changes  in  the  natural 
precipitation  process,  hail  suppression  or  modification  and  alteration  of  other 
weather  phenomena  including  temperature,  wind  direction  and  velocity,  and  the 
initiating,  increasing,  decreasing  and  otherwise  modifying  by  artificial  methods 
of  precipitation  in  the  form  of  rain,  snow,  hail,  mist  or  fog  through  cloud  seeding, 
electrification  or  by  other  means  to  provide  immediate  practical  benefits ; 

2.  "Initiating  precipitation"  refers  to  the  process  of  causing  precipitation  from 
clouds  that  could  not  otherwise  or  inducing  precipitation  significantly  earlier  than 
would  have  occurred  naturally  ; 

3.  ''Increasing  precipitation"  refers  to  the  activation  of  any  process  which  will 
actually  result  in  greater  amounts  of  moisture  reaching  the  ground  in  any  area 
from  a  cloud  or  cloud  system  than  would  have  occurred  naturally  ; 

4.  '"Hail  suppression"  refers  to  the  activation  of  any  process  which  will  reduce, 
modify,  suppress,  eliminate  or  soften  hail  formed  in  clouds  or  storms ; 

5.  "Person"  means  any  person,  firm,  association,  organization,  partnership, 
company,  corporation,  private  or  public,  county,  city,  trust  or  other  public 
agencies : 

6.  "Controller"  refers  to  any  licensee  duly  authorized  in  this  state  to  engage  in 
weather  modification  activities ; 

7.  "Board"  means  the  North  Dakota  weather  modification  board  which,  in  the 
exercise  of  the  powers  granted  herein,  shall  have  all  of  the  powers  of  an  admin- 
istrative agency  as  defined  in  chapter  28-32  ; 

8.  "Research  and  development"  means  exploration,  field  experimentation,  and 
extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a  scientific  or  technical  nature 
into  practical  application  for  experimental  and  demonstration  purposes,  including 
the  experimental  production  of  models,  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  proc- 
esses ;  and 

9.  "Operation"  means  the  performance  of  any  weather  modification  activity 
undertaken  for  the  purpose  of  producing  or  attempting  to  produce  any  form  of 
modifying  effect  upon  the  weather  within  a  limited  geographical  area  or  within 
a  limited  period  of  time. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  2  :  1975.  ch.  50.  §§  3,  4. 

2-07-02.1.  North  Dakota  weather  modification  board — Created — Membership. — 
There  is  hereby  created  a  North  Dakota  weather  modification  board  which  shall 


576 


be  a  division  of  the  state  aeronautics  commission.  The  board  shall  be  composed  of 
the  director  of  the  state  aeronautics  commission,  a  representative  of  the  environ- 
mental section  of  the  state  department  of  health,  state  engineer  of  the  state  water 
conservation  commission,  and  seven  additional  board  members  ;  one  member  from 
each  of  seven  districts  established  by  section  2-07-02.2.  The  governor  shall  ap- 
point one  board  member  for  each  of  the  seven  districts  from  a  list  of  three  candi- 
dates given  to  him  by  weather  modification  authorities  in  each  such  district : 

1.  When  the  entire  board  is  to  be  initially  appointed,  provided  that  such  ap- 
pointments shall  be  made  within  thirty  days  after  July  1,  1975. 

2.  When  the  term  of  office  of  any  board  member  from  any  district  is  about  to 
expire. 

3.  When  a  vacancy  has  occurred,  or  is  about  to  occur,  in  the  term  of  office  of  a 
board  member  from  any  district  for  any  reason  other  than  expiration  of  term  of 
office. 

Board  members  from  each  district  shall  serve  for  a  four-year  term  of  office 
except  in  the  event  the  governor  shall  appoint  a  member  for  an  unexpired  term, 
in  which  case  the  member  shall  serve  only  for  the  unexpired  term.  In  the  event 
any  district  fails  to  furnish  a  list  to  the  governor,  or  if  there  are  no  weather 
modification  authorities  under  this  chapter  within  a  district,  then  the  governor 
shall  appoint  a  board  member  of  his  choice  residing  within  such  district. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  5. 

2-07-02.2.  Weather  modification  board — Districts  created. — Members  of  the 
weather  modification  board  shall  be  appointed  from  districts  containing  the  fol- 
lowing counties :  District  I — Burke,  Divide,  McKenzie,  Mountrail,  and  Williams  ; 
District  II — Bottineau,  McHenry,  McLean,  Renville,  Sheridan,  and  Ward;  Dis- 
trict III — Benson,  Cavalier,  Eddy,  Foster,  Griggs,  Nelson,  Pierce,  Ramsey,  Rol- 
ette, Steele,  Towner,  and  Wells;  District  IV — Cass,  Grand  Forks,  Pembina, 
Richland,  Traill,  and  Walsh;  District  V — Barnes,  Dickey,  Kidder,  LaMoure, 
Logan,  Mcintosh,  Ransom,  Sargent,  and  Stutsman ;  District  VI — Burleigh,  Em- 
mons, Grant,  Mercer,  Morton,  Oliver,  and  Sioux ;  District  VII — Adams,  Billings, 
Bowman,  Dunn,  Golden  Valley,  Hettinger,  Slope,  and  Stark. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  6. 

2-01-02.3.  Direction  and  supervision  by  aeronautics  commission — Independent 
functions  retained  bp  board. — The  powers,  functions,  and  duties  of  the  North 
Dakota  weather  modification  board  shall  be  administered  under  the  direction  and 
supervision  of  the  North  Dakota  aeronautics  commission,  but  the  board  shall  re- 
tain the  quasi-judicial,  quasi-legislation,  advisory,  and  other  nonadministrative 
and  budgetary  functions  otherwise  vested  in  it. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  7. 

2-07-02.4.  Weather  modification  board — Officers — Compensation. — All  mem- 
bers of  the  weather  modification  board,  with  the  exception  of  the  chairman, 
shall  be  voting  members.  The  board  shall  elect  annually  from  its  membership  a 
chairman,  vice  chairman,  and  secretary.  A  majority  of  the  members  shall  con- 
stitute a  quorum  for  the  purpose  of  conducting  the  business  of  the  board.  Board 
members  who  are  not  full-time  salaried  employees  of  this  state  shall  receive 
compensation  in  the  amount  provided  in  subsection  1  of  section  54-35-10,  and 
shall  be  reimbursed  for  their  mileage  and  expenses  in  the  amounts  provided  by 
sections  44-08-04  and  54-06-09.  All  other  members  of  the  board  shall  be  reim- 
bursed for  necessary  travel  and  other  expenses  incurred  in  the  performance  of 
the  business  of  the  board  in  the  amounts  provided  in  sections  44-08-04  and 
54-06-09. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  8. 

2-07-02.5.  Powers  and  duties  of  weather  modification  board. — The  board  may 
exercise  the  following  powers  and  shall  have  the  following  duties : 

1.  The  board  shall  appoint  an  executive  director  to  serve  at  its  discretion,  and 
perform  such  duties  as  assigned  by  the  board. 

2.  The  board  shall  authorize  the  employment  of  whatever  staff  it  deems  neces- 
sary to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  chapter.  The  executive  director  shall  hire 
the  staff,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  board. 

3.  The  board  shall  make  reasonable  rules  and  regulations  concerning:  quali- 
fications, procedures  and  conditions  for  issuance,  revocation,  suspension,  and 
modification  of  licenses  and  permits;  standards  and  instructions  governing 
weather  modification  operations,  including  monitoring  and  evaluation;  record- 
keeping and  reporting,  and  the  board  shall  establish  procedures  and  forms  for 
such  recordkeeping  and  reporting.  The  board  may  adopt  all  other  reasonable 


rules  and  regulations  necessary  to  the  administration  of  this  chapter.  The  pro- 
visions of  chapter  2^32  shall  apply  to  this  chapter. 

4.  The  board  may  contract  with  any  person,  association,  partnership,  or  cor- 
poration, with  the  federal  government,  and  with  any  county  or  groups  of  coun- 
ties, as  provided  in  section  2-07-05,  to  carry  out  weather  modification  operations 
and  shall,  in  connection  with  regulated  weather  modification  operations,  carry 
on  monitoring  and  evaluation  activities. 

5.  The  board  may  order  any  person  who  is  conducting  weather  modification 
operations  in  violation  of  this  chapter,  or  any  rules  and  regulations  promulgated 
pursuant  to  it,  to  cease  and  desist  from  such  operations  and  such  order  shall  be 
enforceable  in  any  court  of  competent  jurisdiction  within  this  state. 

6.  The  board  may  cooperate  and  contract  with  any  private  person  or  any  local, 
state,  or  national  commission,  organization,  or  agency  engaged  in  activities  sim- 
ilar to  the  work  of  the  board  and  may  make  contracts  and  agreements  to  carry 
out  programs  consistent  with  the  purpose  and  intent  of  this  chapter.  The  board 
may  also,  in  accordance  with  law,  request  and  accept  any  grants  of  funds  or 
services  from  any  such  commission,  organization,  person,  or  agency,  and  expend 
such  funds  or  use  such  services  to  carry  out  the  provisions  of  this  chapter. 

7.  The  board  shall  administer  and  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  and 
do  all  things  reasonably  necessary  to  effectuate  the  purposes  of  this  chapter. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  9. 

2-07-03.  License  and  permit  required. — Except  as  provided  in  section 
2-07-03.1,  no  person  may  engage  in  weather  modification  activiites  without  both 
a  professional  weather  modification  license  issued  under  section  2-07-03.2  and  a 
weather  modification  permit  issued  under  section  2-07-04.  Licenses  shall  expire  on 
December  thirty-first  of  the  year  of  issuance. 

2-01-03.1.  Exemptions. — The  board  may  provide  by  rules  and  regulations  for 
exemption  of  the  following  activities  from  the  permit  and  license  requirements 
of  section  2-07-03 : 

1.  Research  and  development  conducted  by  the  state,  political  subdivisions  of 
the  state,  colleges  and  universities  of  the  state,  agencies  of  the  federal  govern- 
ment, or  bona  fide  research  corporations. 

2.  Weather  modification  operations  of  an  emergency  nature  taken  against  fire, 
frost,  or  fog. 

Exempted  activities  shall  be  so  conducted  so  as  not  to  unduly  interfere  with 
weather  modification  operations  conducted  under  a  permit  issued  in  accordance 
with  this  chapter. 

Source :  S.  L.  197o,  ch.  50,  §  11. 

2-01-03.2.  Operator  deemed  to  be  doing  business  within  state — Resident 
agent. — A  person  shall  be  deemed  doing  business  within  this  state  when  engaged 
in  weather  modification  operations  within  the  boundaries  of  this  state,  and  shall, 
if  not  already  qualified  to  do  business  within  this  state  under  chapter  10-22,  prior 
to  conducting  such  operation,  file  with  the  secretary  of  state  an  authorization 
designating  an  agent  for  the  service  of  process. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  12. 

2-01-03.3  Issuance  of  license — Fee. — The  board  shall  provide,  by  rules  and 
regulations,  the  procedure  and  criteria  for  the  issuance  of  a  license.  The  board,  in 
■accordance  with  its  rules  and  regulations,  shall  issue  a  weather  modification 
license  to  each  applicant  who  : 

1.  Pays  a  license  fee  of  fifty  dollars. 

2.  Demonstrates,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  board,  competence  to  engage  in 
weather  modification  operations. 

3.  Designates  an  agent  for  the  purpose  of  service  of  process  pursuant  to  section 
-2-07-03.2  or  chapter  10-22. 

Each  license  issued  by  the  board  shall  be  nontransferable  and  shall  expire  on 
December  thirty-first  of  the  year  of  issuance.  A  license  shall  be  revocable  for 
cause  at  any  time  prior  to  such  date  if,  after  holding  a  hearing  pursuant  to  due 
notice  thereof,  the  board  shall  so  determine.  License  fees  collected  by  the  board 
shall  be  paid  into  the  general  fund  of  the  state  treasury. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975.  ch.  50,  §  13. 

2-01-034.  Revocation  or  suspension  of  license. — The  board  may  suspend  or 
revoke  a  license  for  any  of  the  following  reasons : 

1.  Incompetency. 

2.  Dishonest  practice. 

3.  False  or  fraudulent  representations  made  in  obtaining  a  license  or  permit 
under  this  chapter. 


578 


4.  Failure  to  comply  with  any  provisions  of  this  chapter,  or  any  rules  or  regu- 
lations of  the  board  made  pursuant  to  this  chapter. 
Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  14. 

2-07-0^.  Permit  required — Issuance  of  permit — Fee. — 

1.  A  Weather  modification  permit  shall  be  required  for  each  geographical  area,, 
as  set  out  in  the  operational  plan  required  by  subsection  2  of  this  section,  in 
which  a  person  intends  to  conduct  weather  modification  operations.  Each  permit 
issued  by  the  board  shall  expire  on  December  thirty-first  of  the  year  of  issuance.  A 
person  applying  for  a  weather  modification  operational  permit  shall  file  an 
application  with  the  board,  in  such  form  as  the  board  shall  prescribe,  which  ap- 
plication shall  be  accompanied  by  an  application  fee  of  twenty-five  dollars  and 
contain  such  information  as  the  board,  by  rule  or  regulation,  may  require,  and 
in  addition,  each  applicant  for  a  permit  shall : 

a.  Furnish  proof  of  financial  responsibility  as  provided  by  section  2-07-04.3. 

b.  Set  forth  a  complete  operational  plan  for  the  proposed  operation  which 
shall  include  a  specific  statement  of  its  nature  and  object,  a  map  of  the  pro- 
posed operating  area  which  specifies  the  primary  target  area  for  the  pro* 
l>osed  operation  and  shows  the  area  that  is  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected 
by  such  operation,  a  statement  of  the  approximate  time  during  which  the 
operation  is  to  be  conducted,  a  list  of  the  materials  and  methods  to  be  used 
in  conducting  the  operation,  and  such  other  detailed  information  as  may  be 
needed  to  describe  the  operation. 

2.  The  board  may  issue  the  operational  permit  if  it  determines  that : 

a.  The  applicant  holds  a  valid  weather  modification  license  issued  under 
this  chapter. 

b.  The  applicant  has  furnished  satisfactory  proof  of  financial  responsibility 
in  accordance  with  section  2-07-04.3. 

c.  The  applicant  has  paid  the  required  application  fee. 

d.  The  operation : 

(1)  Is  reasonably  conceived  to  improve  water  quantity  or  quality,  re- 
duce loss  from  weather  hazards,  provide  economic  benefits  for  the  people 
of  this  state,  advance  scientific  knowledge  or  otherwise  carry  out  the 
purposes  of  this  chapter. 

(2)  Is  designed  to  include  adequate  safeguards  to  minimize  or  avoid 
possible  damage  to  the  public  health,  safety,  or  welfare  or  to  the  environ- 
ment. 

(3)  Will  not  adversely  affect  another  operation  for  which  a  permit 
has  been  issued. 

e.  The  applicant  has  North  Dakota  workmen's  compensation  insurance 
coverage  for  all  employees  working  in  North  Dakota. 

f.  The  applicant  has  furnished  a  performance  bond  as  required  by  section 
2-07-00. 

g.  The  applicant  has  complied  with  such  other  requirements  for  the  issu- 
ance of  permits  as  may  be  required  by  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the 
board. 

h.  The  applicant  has  furnished  a  bid  bond  in  accordance  with  section 
2-07-09.1. 

i.  The  applicant  has  registered,  with  the  North  Dakota  aeronautics  com- 
mission, any  aircraft  and  pilots  intended  to  be  used  in  connection  with  the 
operation. 

In  order  to  carry  out  the  objectives  and  purposes  of  this  chapter,  the  board 
may  condition  and  limit  permits  as  to  primary  target  areas,  time  of  the  operation, 
materials,  equipment,  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation,  emer- 
gency shutdown  procedure,  emergency  assistance,  and  such  other  operational 
requirements  as  may  be  established  by  the  board. 

3.  The  board  shall  issue  only  one  permit  at  a  time  for  operations  in  any  geo- 
graphical area  if  two  or  more  operations  conducted  in  such  an  area  according 
to  permit  limitations  blight  adversely  interfere  with  one  another. 

4.  All  permit  fees  collected  by  the  board  shall  be  paid  into  the  general  fund 
of  the  state  treasury. 

2-07-OJf.l.  llrnrinqs. — The  board  shall  give  public  notice,  in  the. official  county 
newspaper  or  newspapers  in  the  area  of  the  state  reasonably  expected  to  be 
a fiected  by  operations  conducted  under  a  permit,  that  it  is  considering  an  applica- 
tion for  such  permit,  and.  if  objection  to  the  issuance  of  the  permit  is  received 
by  the  board  wit  bin  twenty  days,  the  board  may  hold  a  public  hearing  for  the 


579 


purpose  of  obtaining  information  from  the  public  concerning  the  effects  of  issuing 
the  permit.  The  board  may  also  hold  such  hearings  Upon  its  own  motion. 
Source  :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  16. 

2-07-04.2.  Revocation,  suspension,  or  modification  of  permit. — The  board  may 
suspend  or  revoke  a  permit  if  it  appears  that  the  permittee  no  longer  has  the 
qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  an  original  permit  or  has  violated 
any  provision  of  this  chapter,  or  any  of  the  rules  and  regulations  issued  under  it. 

The  board  may  revise  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a  permit  if  : 

1.  The  permittee  is  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a  hearing,  to 
be  held  in  accordance  with  chapter  28-32. 

2.  It  appears  to  the  board  that  a  modification  of  the  conditions  and  limits  of 
a  permit  is  necessary  to  protect  the  public's  health,  safety,  or  welfare  or  the 
environment. 

If  it  appears  to  the  board  that  an  emergency  situation  exists  or  is  impending 
which  could  endanger  the  public's  health,  safety,  or  welfare  or  the  environ- 
ment, the  board  may,  without  prior  notice  or  hearing,  immediately  modify  the 
conditions  or  limits  of  a  permit,  or  order  temporary  suspension  of  a  permit.  The 
issuance  of  such  an  order  shall  include  notice  of  a  hearing  to  be  held  within  ten 
days  thereafter  on  the  question  of  permanently  modifying  the  conditions  and  lim- 
its or  continuing  the  suspension  of  the  permit.  Failure  to  comply  with  an  order 
temporarily  suspending  an  operation  or  modifying  the  conditions  and  limits  of  a 
permit  shall  be  grounds  for  immediate  revocation  of  the  license  and  permit  of 
the  person  controlling  or  engaged  in  the  operation. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  17. 

2-07-04-3.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility. — Proof  of  financial  responsibility 
is  made  by  showing  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  board  that  the  permittee  has  the 
ability  to  respond  in  damages  to  liability  which  might  reasonably  result  from 
the  operation  for  which  the  permit  is  sought.  Such  proof  of  financial  responsi- 
bility may  be  shown  by  : 

1.  Presentation  to  the  board  of  proof  of  a  prepaid  noncancellable  insurance 
policy  against  such  liability,  in  an  amount  approved  by  the  board. 

2.  Filing  with  the  board  a  corporate  surety  bond,  cash,  or  negotiable  securities 
in  an  amount  approved  by  the  board. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  18. 

2-07-05.  Board  may  create  operating  districts — Representation  of  noncon- 
trading  counties. — The  board  shall  have  the  authority  to  place  any  county  con- 
tracting with  the  state  for  weather  modification  operations,  in  such  an  opera- 
tional district  as  the  board  shall  deem  necessary  to  best  provide  such  county  with 
the  benefits  of  weather  modification.  In  determining  the  boundaries  of  such  oper- 
ating districts,  the  board  shall  consider  the  patterns  of  crops  within  the  state, 
climatic  patterns,  and  the  limitations  of  aircraft  and  other  technical  equipment. 
The  board  may  assign  any  county  which  has  not  created  a  weather  modification 
authority  under  this  chapter  to  an  operating  district  solely  for  the  purpose  of 
representation  on  the  operations  committee  of  such  district. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  5  ;  1975,  ch.  50,  §  19. 

CROSS-REFEREXCE 

Suspension  of  issuance  of  weather  modification  permits  at  direction  of  division 
of  disaster  emergency  services,  see  §  37-17.1-15. 

2-07-05.1.    District  operations  advisory  committees  created — Duties. — 

1.  There  shall  be  a  district  operations  advisory  committee  in  each  operations 
district  created  in  accordance  with  section  2-07-05.  Each  committee  shall  be  com- 
posed of  one  commissioner  of  the  weather  modification  authority  from  each  county 
within  such  district  and  one  member  of  the  board  of  county  commissioners  from 
the  county  or  counties  assigned  to  the  district  in  accordance  with  section  2-07-05. 
Each  advisory  committee  shall,  upon  majority  vote,  with  the  concurrence  of  the 
board,  prescribe  rules,  regulations,  and  bylaws  necessary  to  govern  its  procedures 
and  meetings.  Each  committee  shall  evaluate  weather  modification  operations 
within  their  respective  districts  and  make  recommendations  and  proposals  to 
the  board  concerning  such  operations. 

2.  The  weather  modification  authority  of  any  county  authorized  to  contract 
for  weather  modification  operations  under  this  chapter  and  not  assigned  to  an 
operations  district,  shall  assume  the  functions  of  the  district  operations  com- 
mittee and  shall  have  and  may  exercise  the  powers  and  duties  assigned  to  such 


580 


operations  committees  by  this  chapter  and  by  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the 
board  of' weather  modification. 
Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  20. 

2-07-05.2.  Weather  modification  authority  map  suspend  operations. — Other 
provisions  of  this  chapter  notwithstanding,  the  weather  modfication  authority 
in  any  county  authorized  to  contract  for  weather  modification  operations  under 
this  chapter  may  suspend  the  county  and  state  weather  modification  operation 
within  that  county  designed  to  alter  the  weather  within  such  county. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  21. 

2-07-06.  Weather  modification  authority  created  oy  petition. — A  weather 
modification  authority  shall  be  created  by  resolution  and  five  commissioners  ap- 
pointed thereto  for  ten-year  terms  of  office,  by  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
after  fifty-one  percent  of  the  qualified  electors  of  a  county,  as  determined  by  the 
vote  cast  for  the  office  of  governor  at  the  last  preceding  general  election,  shall 
petition  the  board  of  county  commissioners  of  their  county  to  create  a  county- 
wide  weather  modification  authority.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  shall 
appoint  the  five  commissioners  to  the  weather  modification  authority,  who  are 
residents  of  their  county,  and  whose  names  are  set  forth  in  the  petition  and  des- 
ignated by  the  petitioner  to  be  appointed  weather  modification  authority  com- 
missioner is  unable  or  refuses  for  any  reason  to  accept  appointment  as  commis- 
sioners to  have  met  the  requirements  as  to  number  of  qualified  electors  attached 
to  be  petition  as  required  in  this  chapter.  In  the  event  any  one  of  the  five  candi- 
dates named  in  the  petition  to  be  appointed  weather  modification  authority  com- 
missioner is  unable  or  refuses  for  any  reason  to  accept  appointment  as  commis- 
sioner, or  is  disqualified  by  not  meeting  residence  requirements,  as  an  elector  in 
the  county,  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  name  its  own  appointee  for 
a  ten-year  term  of  office  in  place  of  any  disqualified  candidate  selected  by  the 
petitioners.  If  any  weather  modification  authority  commissioner  submits  his  res- 
ignation in  writing  to  the  board  of  county  commssioners  or  becomes  unable  or 
disqualified  for  any  reason,  after  accepting  office,  the  board  of  county  commis- 
sioners shall  name  its  appointee  as  a  commissioner  to  the  weather  modification  au- 
thority. All  vacancies  occurring  otherwise  than  by  expiration  of  term  of  office 
shall  be  filled  for  the  unexpired  term. 

Any  weather  modification  authority  created  pursuant  to  this  section  shall 
expire  ten  years  after  the  date  of  the  initial  appointment  of  the  commissioners 
thereto.  Any  unexpended  funds  remaining  in  the  name  of  the  weather  modifica- 
tion authority,  after  all  proper  bills  and  expenses  have  been  paid,  shall  be  trans- 
ferred into  the  county  general  fund  by  the  officers  of  the  weather  modification  au- 
thority on  or  before  the  ten-year  termination  date  provided  by  this  section ;  pro- 
vided, however,  that  all  unexpended  funds  remaining  in  the  name  of  the  weather 
modification  authority,  after  all  proper  bills  and  expenses  have  been  paid,  shall 
remain  in  the  name  of  the  weather  modification  authority  if  the  board  of  county 
commissioners  of  such  county  by  resolution  creates  a  weather  modification 
authority  and  all  its  powers  in  accordance  with  section  2-07-06.4. 

2-01-06.1.  Petition  contents. — The  petition  for  petitioning  the  board  of  county 
commissioners  in  any  county  of  this  state  for  the  creation  and  appointment  of 
commissioners  to  a  weather  modification  authority  shall  under  this  chapter 
contain  : 

1.  A  title  with  the  heading:  "Petition  for  Creation  of  (insert  name  of  county) 
Weather  Modifications  Authority"  ; 

2.  The  following  paragraph :  We,  the  undersigned  qualified  electors  of  (name 
of  county),  state  of  North  Dakota,  by  this  initiated  petition  request  that  the 
( name  of  county)  board  of  county  commissioners  of  said  county  create  by  resolu- 
tion a  (name  of  county)  weather  modification  authority  and  to  appoint  for  a  term 
of  office  of  ten  years  the  following  five  qualified  electors  of  said  county  as  the 
commissioners  for  the  (name  of  county)  weather  modification  authority  :  (a)  The 
name  and  address  of  each  proposed  commissioner  for  the  (name  of  county) 
weather  modification  authority; 

3.  The  following  paragraph :  We,  the  undersigned  qualified  electors  of  the 
'( mime  of  county),  state  of  North  Dakota,  are  noticed  herewith  that  the  creation 
of  (name  of  county)  weather  modification  authority  and  the  appointment  of  its 
commissioners  by  the  (name  of  county)  board  of  county  commissioners  will  grant 
unto  the  authority  by  law  the  power  to  certify  to  the  board  of  county  commis- 
sioners a  mill  levy  tax  not  to  exceed  two  mills  upon  the  net  taxable  valuation  of 
property  in  said  county  for  a  weather  modification  fund,  which  tax  may  be  levied 


5S1 


in  excess  of  the  mill  levy  limit  fixed  by  law  for  taxes  for  general  county  purposes 
and  that  such  fund  shall  be  used  for  weather  modification  activities  in  conjunc- 
tion with  the  state  of  North  Dakota.  We,  the  undersigned  understand  that  the 
authority  requested  in  this  petition  expires  ten  years  after  the  creation  of  the 
weather  modification  authority,  except  that  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
may  be  resolution  create  a  weather  modification  authority  and  all  its  power,  in- 
cluding the  power  to  certify  a  tax  levy  as  provided  by  section  2-07-06.3,  for  five- 
year  periods  in  accordance  with  section  2-07-06.4; 

4.  A  heading:  "Committee  for  Petitioners",  followed  by  this  statement:  The 
following  electors  of  (name  of  county),  state  of  North  Dakota,  are  authorized  to 
represent  and  act  for  us,  and  shall  constitute  the  ''Committee  for  the  Petitioners'' 
iu  the  matter  of  this  petition  and  all  acts  subsequent  thereto; 

5.  Petition  details :  All  petitions'  signatures  shall  be  numbered,  and  dated  by 
month,  day  and  year.  The  name  shall  be  written  with  residence  address  and  post- 
office  address  including  the  county  of  residence  followed  by  state  of  North 
Dakota ; 

6.  An  affidavit  to  be  attached  by  each  petition  and  sworn  to  under  oath  before 
a  notary  public  by  the  person  circulating  each  petition  attesting  to  the  fact  that 
he  circulated  the  petition  and  that  each  of  the  signatures  to  said  petition  is  the 
genuine  signature  of  the  person  whose  name  it  purports  to  be,  and  that  each  such 
person  is  a  qualified  elector  in  the  county  in  which  the  petition  was  circulated ; 
and 

7.  The  petition  must  state  the  mills  to  be  levied  by  the  county  for  the  purposes 
of  this  chapter. 

Sources :  S.  L.  1969,  ch.  82,  §  2 ;  1973,  ch.  49,  §  2 ;  1975,  ch.  50,  §  22. 

2-07-06.2.  Commisioners — Compensation — Meetings — Officers. — A  commis- 
sioner of  a  weather  modification  authority  shall  receive  no  compensation  for  his 
services,  but  shall  be  entitled  to  the  necessary  expense,  as  defined  in  section 
44-08-04,  incurred  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties.  Each  commissioner  shall  hold 
office  until  his  successor  has  been  appointed  and  has  qualified.  The  certificates  of 
the  appointment  shall  be  filed  with  the  weather  modification  authority. 

The  powers  of  each  weather  modification  authority  shall  be  vested  in  the  com- 
missioners thereof.  A  majority  of  the  commissioners  of  an  authority  shall  con- 
stitute a  quorum  for  the  purpose  of  conducting  business  of  the  authority  and 
exercising  its  powers  and  for  all  other  purposes.  Action  may  be  taken  by  the 
authority  upon  a  vote  of  not  less  than  a  majority  of  all  the  commissioners. 

There  shall  be  elected  a  chairman,  vice-chairman,  and  treasurer  from  among 
the  commissioners.  A  weather  modification  authority  may  employ  an  executive  di- 
rector, secretary,  technical  experts,  and  such  other  officers,  agents,  and  employees, 
permanent  and  temporary,  as  it  may  require,  and  shall  determine  their  qualifica- 
tions, duties,  and  compensation.  For  such  legal  services  as  it  may  require,  an 
authority  may  call  upon  the  chief  law  officer  of  the  county  which  created  the 
authority.  An  authority  may  delegate  to  one  or  more  of  its  agents  or  employees 
such  powers  or  duties  as  it  may  deem  proper. 

Minutes  shall  be  kept  by  the  secretary  of  official  meetings  and  shall  include  all 
official  business  such  as  contracts  authorized  and  all  authorizations  for  payment 
of  weather  modification  authority  funds  to  persons,  organizations,  companies, 
and  corporations.  All  disbursements  shall  be  approved  by  a  majority  of  all  the 
commissioners  of  an  authority.  Disbursements  authorized  by  the  authority  for 
the  payment  of  employee  salaries,  bills,  contracts,  services,  fees,  expenses,  and 
all  other  obligations,  shall  be  made  by  check  signed  by  the  chairman  and  the 
treasurer  of  the  authority.  Official  policies  shall  also  be  entered  into  the  minutes. 
An  annual  report  shall  be  compiled  with  complete  disclosure  of  funds  expended 
for  contracts,  services,  fees,  salaries  and  all  other  reimbursements,  a  copy  of 
which  shall  be  filed  with  the  county  auditor.  Such  report  shall  be  given  at  a 
public  meeting  called  for  such  purpose. 

Source :  S.  L.  1969,  ch.  82,  §  3 ;  1973,  ch.  49,  §  3. 

2-01-06.S.  Tax  levy  may  be  certified  by  weather  modification  authority. — The 
weather  modification  authority  may  certify  annually  to  the  board  of  county  com- 
missioners a  tax  of  not  to  exceed  two  mills  upon  the  net  taxable  valuation  of 
the  property  in  the  county  for  a  "weather  modification"  fund  which  tax  shall  be 
levied  by  the  board  of  county  commissioners  and  which  tax  may  be  levied  in 
excess  of  the  mill  limit  fixed  by  law  for  taxes  for  general  county  purposes.  Such 
fund  shall  be  used  only  for  weather  modification  activities  in  conjunction  with 
the  state  of  North  Dakota.  The  tax  certified  by  the  weather  modification  authority 


582 


is  limited  to  the  period  of  existence  of  the  weather  modification  authority  as 
provided  for  in  this  chapter. 

Source:  S.  L.  1909,  ch.  82,  §  4;  1973,  ch.  49,  §  4;  1975,  ch.  50,  §  23. 

2-07-06..$.  Creation  of  weather  modification  authority  and  its  powers  by 
resolution. — When  a  weather  modification  authority  is  about  to  expire,  the  board 
of  county  commissioners  of  any  such  county  may  by  resolution  authorize  the 
creation  of  such  weather  modification  authority  and  all  its  powers,  including 
the  power  to  certify  a  tax  levy  as  provided  by  section  2-07-06.3  for  additional 
five-year  periods  provided,  the  resolution  authorizing  the  creation  of  such 
weather  modification  authority  is  adopted  by  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
before  the  expiration  date  prescribed  in  the  preceding  resolution  for  its  termi- 
nation. Upon  passing  such  resolution  for  the  creation  of  the  authority,  the  board 
of  county  commissioners  shall  appoint  five  weather  modification  authority  com- 
missioners to  five-year  terms  of  office,  subsequently  filling  vacancies  in  the  man- 
ner prescribed  by  section  2-07-06.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  may 
remove  from  office  any  weather  modification  commissioner,  whenever  it  appears 
to  them  by  competent  evidence  and  after  a  hearing  that  such  commissioner  has 
been  guilty  of  misconduct,  malfeasance,  crime  in  office,  neglect  of  duty  in  office, 
or  of  habitual  drunkenness  or  gross  incompetency. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1973,  ch.  49,  §  5. 

2-07-06.5.  Procedure  for  abolishment  of  weather  modification  authority  and 
all  its  powers  by  recall  initiated  petition. — After  fifty-one  percent  of  the  quali- 
fied electors  of  a  county,  as  determined  by  the  vote  cast  for  the  office  of  governor 
at  the  last  preceding  gubernatorial  election,  shall  petition  the  board  of  county 
commissioners  of  their  county  to  recall  the  commissioners  of  a  weather  modifi- 
cation authority  as  created  by  section  2-07-06  and  to  abolish  such  county  weather 
modification  authority,  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  adopt  a  resolu- 
tion recalling  all  commissioners  of  such  weather  modification  authority  and 
abolish  their  appointed  office  and  abolish  such  weather  modification  authority 
until  such  time  as  a  weather  modification  authority  is  created  by  petition  in 
accordance  with  section  2-07-06.  provided  that  such  recall  petition  has  been 
found  by  the  county  commissioners  to  have  met  the  requirements  as  to  the  num- 
ber of  qualified  electors  attached  to  the  petition  as  required  in  this  chapter.  In 
the  event  the  board  of  county  commissioners  certifies  the  sufficiency  and  validity 
of  the  recall  petition  and  adopts  a  resolution  recalling  all  commissioners  of  a 
weather  modification  authority  and  abolishes  such  authority,  then  all  unexpended 
funds  remaining  in  the  name  of  the  weather  modification  authority,  after  all 
proper  bills  and  expenses  have  been  paid,  shall  be  transferred  into  the  county  gen- 
eral fund  by  the  officers  of  the  weather  modification  authority  on  the  effective  date 
of  such  recall  and  abolishment  resolution  adopted  by  the  board  of  county  commis- 
sioners. Tn  the  event  there  are  outstanding  valid  bills  unpaid  after  such  date,  the 
board  of  county  commissioners  is  hereby  authorized  to  pay  such  proper  obliga- 
tions from  moneys  in  the  county  general  fund.  A  recall  initiated  petition  shall 
have  a  title  with  the  heading:  "Recall  Petition  for  the  Abolishment  of  (insert 
name  of  county)  Weather  Modification  Authority".  Such  recall  petition  shall 
incorporate  a  paragraph  stating  its  purpose  in  clear  lansruage  and  shall  comply 
with  all  requirements  prescribed  in  subsections  4.  5.  and  6  of  section  2-07-06.1 
relating  to  petition  contents,  committee  for  petitioners,  petition  details,  affidavits 
and  persons  circulating  such  petitions. 

2-07-06.6.  Creation  of  weaiher  modification  authority  by  election. — When  a 
petition  signed  by  not  less  than  twenty  percent  of  the  qualified  electors  of  the 
county,  as  determined  by  the  vote  cast  for  the  office  of  governor  at  the  last 
preceding  gubernatorial  election,  requesting  an  election  upon  the  establishment 
of  such  recall  and  abolishment  resolution  adopted  by  the  board  of  county  commis- 
sioners, the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  submit  the  question  to  the  elec- 
tors of  the  county  at  the  next  county-wide  election.  Upon  approval  bv  a  majority 
of  the  votes  cast,  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  establish  a  weather 
modification  authority  as  described  in  section  2-07-06.  with  all  its  powers,  in- 
cluding the  power  to  certify  a  tax  lew  as  provided  bv  section  2-07-06.3. 

Source:  S.  L.  1973.  ch.  49,  §  7. 

2-07-06.7.  Abolishment  of  wenther  modification  authority  by  election. — When 
a  petition  Signed  by  not  less  than  twenty  percent  of  the  qualified  electors  of  the 
county,  as  determined  by  the  vote  cast  for  governor  in  the  last  preceding  guha- 
natorial  election,  rouuosfiiur  an  election  upon  the  abolishment  of  a  weather 
modification  authority  as  created  in  section  2-07-O6.4  and  section  2-07-06. 6  is 
presented  to  the  board  of  county  commissioners,  the  board  of  county  commis- 


583 


sinners  shall  submit  the  question  to  the  electors  of  the  county  at  the  next  county- 
wide  election.  Upon  approval  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast,  the  board  of  county 
commissioners  shall  abolish  the  weather  modification  authority  as  of  December 
thirty-first  following  the  election.  All  unexpended  funds  remaining  in  the  name 
of  the  weather  modification  authority,  after  all  proper  bills  and  expenses  have 
been  paid,  shall  be  deposited  in  the  general  fund  of  the  county. 
Source :  S.  L.  1973,  ch.  49,  §  8. 

2-07-06.8.  Creation  of  weather  modification  authority  by  vote  after  resolution 
of  county  commissioners. — The  board  of  county  commissioners  of  any  county  may, 
by  resolution  after  a  public  hearing,  submit  the  question  of  the  creation  of  a 
weather  modification  authority  to  the  electors  of  the  county  at  the  next  county- 
wide  election.  Upon  approval  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast,  the  board  of  county 
commissioners  shall  pass  a  resolution  creating  a  weather  modification  authority, 
as  described  in  section  2-07-06,  including  the  authority  to  levy  a  tax  as  provided 
by  section  2-07-06.3. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  24. 

2-07-07.  County  budget  may  be  waived  for  first  appropriation — Conditions. — 
The  provisions  of  chapter  11-23  shall  not  apply  to  appropriations  made  under  the 
provisions  of  this  chapter,  provided,  however,  that  only  after  the  filing  and  ap- 
proval of  the  "petitions"  to  create  a  weather  modification  authority  by  the  board 
of  county  commissioners  and  certification  of  a  mill  levy  by  the  weather  modifica- 
tion authority  and  only  for  the  initial  or  first  appropriation  of  said  "weather 
modification"  activities,  such  county  commissioners  may,  at  their  discretion,  ap- 
propriate from  moneys  not  otherwise  appropriated  in  the  general  fund,  such 
moneys  as  are  necessary  for  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  chapter,  provided 
that  said  appropriation  shall  not  exceed  an  amount  equal  to  two-mill  levy  upon 
the  net  taxable  valuation  of  the  property  in  said  county. 

Source:  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71.  §  7;  1969,  ch.  82,  §  5. 

2-07-08.  Bids  required — When. — Whenever  the  board  of  weather  modification 
shall  undertake  to  contract  with  any  licensed  controller  in  an  amount  in  excess 
of  ten  thousand  dollars  in  any  one  year,  the  board  shall  advertise  for  proposals 
for  such  weather  modification  activities  and  in  its  proceedings  with  respect 
to  bids  therefor,  shall  substantially  follow  the  manner  and  form  required  by 
the  laws  of  this  state  for  the  purchase  of  supplies  by  the  department  of  accounts 
and  purchases.  The  board  shall  enter  into  no  contract  or  agreement  for  weather 
modification  services  except  with  a  controller,  holding  the  permit  as  required  by 
This  chapter,  except  for  the  purpose  of  gathering  technical  information,  and 
making  studies  or  survevs. 

Source:  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  8;  1973,  ch.  49,  §  9;  1975.  ch.  50,  §  25. 

2-07-09.  Performance  bond  required. — Before  the  board  shall  contract  with 
any  controller,  it  shall  require  the  controller  to  furnish  a  surety  bond  for  the 
faithful  performance  of  the  contract  in  such  amount  as  determined  by  the  board, 
conditioned  that  the  licensee  and  his  agents  will  in  all  respects  faithfully  per- 
form all  weather  modification  contracts  undertaken  with  the  board  and  will 
comply  wTith  all  provisions  of  this  chapter  and  the  contract  entered  into  by 
the  board  and  the  licensee. 

Source:  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  9 :  1973,  ch.  49,  §  10:  1975,  ch.  50,  §  20. 

2-07-09.1  Bid  bond  required. — All  bids  submitted  to  the  board  of  weather 
modification  for  operations  conducted  under  this  chapter  shall  be  accompanied 
by  a  bidder's  bond  in  a  sum  equal  to  five  percent  of  the  full  amount  of  the  bid, 
executed  by  the  bidder  as  principal  and  by  a  surety  company  authorized  to  do 
business  in  this  state  as  a  guaranty  that  the  bidder  will  enter  into  the  contract 
if  it  is  awarded  to  him. 

Source  :  S.  L.  1975.  ch.  50.  §  27. 

2-07-10.  State  immunity. — Nothing  in  this  chapter  shall  be  construed  to  im- 
pose or  accept  any  liability  or  responsibility  on  the  part  of  the  state  of  North 
Dakota  or  any  of  its  agencies,  or  any  state  officials  or  state  employees  or  weather 
modification  authorities  for  any  injury  caused  by  weather  modification  opera- 
tions by  any  person  or  licensed  controller  as  defined  in  this  chapter. 

Source:  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  10;  1973,  ch.  49,  §  11 ;  1975,  ch.  50,  §  28. 

2-07-10.1.  Liability  of  controller. — 

1.  An  operation  conducted  under  the  license  and  permit  requirements  of 
this  chapter  is  not  an  ultrahazardous  or  abnormally  dangerous  activity  which 
makes  the  permittee  subject  to  liability  without  fault. 

2.  Dissemination  of  materials  and  substances  into  the  atmosphere  by  a  per- 
mittee acting  within  the  conditions  and  limits  of  his  permit  shall  not  constitute 
trespass. 


584 


3.  Except  as  provided  in  this  section  and  in  section  2-07-10,  nothing  in  this 
chapter  shall  prevent  any  person  adversely  affected  by  a  weather  modifica- 
tion operation  from  recovering  damages  resulting  from  negligent  or  inten- 
tionally harmful  conduct  by  a  permittee. 

4.  The  fact  that  a  person  holds  a  license  or  was  issued  a  permit  under  this 
chapter,  or  that  he  has  complied  with  the  rules  and  regulations  made  by  the 
board  pursuant  to  this  chapter,  is  not  admissible  as  a  defense  in  any  legal 
action  which  may  be  brought  against  him. 

Source :  S.  L.  1975,  ch.  50,  §  29. 

2-07-11.  Weather  modification  board  may  receive  and  expend  funds. — The 
weather  modification  board  is  hereby  authorized  to  receive  and  accept  for  and 
in  the  name  of  the  state  any  and  all  funds  which  may  be  offered  or  become 
available  from  federal  grants  or  appropriations,  private  gifts,  donations  or 
bequests,  county  funds,  or  funds  from  any  other  source,  except  license  and  permit 
fees,  and  to  expend  said  funds  for  the  expense  of  administering  this  chapter, 
and,  with  the  exception  of  county  funds,  for  the  encouragement  of  research  and 
development  in  weather  modification  by  any  private  person,  the  North  Dakota 
state  university,  the  university  of  North  Dakota,  or  any  other  appropriate 
state,  county,  or  public  agency  in  this  state  either  by  direct  grant,  by  contract, 
or  by  other  means. 

All  federal  grants,  federal  appropriations,  private  gifts,  donations  or  bequests, 
county  funds,  or  funds  from  any  other  source,  except  license  and  permit  fees, 
received  by  the  board  shall  be  paid  over  to  the  state  treasurer,  who  shall  credit 
same  to  a  special  fund  in  the  state  treasurer,  who  shall  credit  some  to  a  special 
fund  in  the  state  treasury  known  as  the  "state  weather  modification  fund". 
All  proceeds  deposited  by  the  state  treasurer  in  the  state  weather  modifi- 
cation fund  are  hereby  appropriated  to  the  North  Dakota  weather  modifica- 
tion board  and  shall,  if  expended,  be  disbursed  by  warrant-check  prepared 
by  the  department  of  accounts  and  purchases  upon  vouchers  submitted  by 
the  North  Dakota  weather  modification  board,  and  shall  be  used  for  the  pur- 
pose of  paying  for  the  expense  of  administration  of  this  chapter  and.  with 
the  exception  of  county  funds,  for  the  encouragement  of  research  and  develop- 
ment in  weather  modification  by  any  private  person,  the  North  Dakota  state 
university,  the  university  of  North  Dakota,  or  any  other  appropriate  state,  coun- 
ty, or  public  agency  bv  direct  grant,  bv  contract,  or  bv  other  means. 

Source :  S.  L.  1965,  ch.  71,  §  11 ;  1975,  ch.  50,  §  30. 

2-07-11.1.  County  appropriations — State  to  provide  matching  funds. — Any  coun- 
ty weather  modification  authority  which  has  contracted  with  the  board  of 
weather  modification  for  weather  modification  operations  under  this  chapter 
shall  appropriate  to  the  state  weather  modification  fund  one-half  of  the  total 
amount  determined  by  the  board  of  weather  modification  as  necessary  to  provide 
such  county  with  weather  modification  operations.  The  board  of  weather  modifica- 
tion may  expend,  from  the  state  weather  modification  fund,  such  funds  as  it 
deems  necessary  to  provide  contracting  counties  with  weather  modification 
operations. 

2-07-12.  Aeronautics  commission — Compensation — Expenses. — Each  member  of 
the  North  Dakota  aeronautics  commission  shall  receive  the  same  compensation 
that  is  paid  for  other  aeronautics  commission  duties  for  each  day  actually  and 
necessarily  engaged  in  performance  of  official  duties  in  connection  with  the 
administration  of  this  chapter,  and  commission  members  and  employees  shall 
be  reimbursed  for  actual  and  necessary  expenses  incurred  in  carrying  out  their 
official  duties  in  the  same  manner  and  at  the  same  rates  as  provided  by  law 
for  state  employees. 

2-07-13.  Penalty. — Any  person  contracting  for  or  conducting  any  weather 
modification  activity  without  being  licensed  in  accordance  with  the  provisions 
of  this  chapter  or  otherwise  violating  the  provisions  thereof  shall  be  guilty  of  a 
class  B  misdemeanor. 

Oklahoma 
Okla.  Stat.  Ann.  Tit.  2,  §§  1401-1432 

Chapter  29 — Oklahoma  Weather  Modification  Act 

Sec. 

1401.  Short  title. 

1402.  Definitions. 
340.'i.    Powers  of  Board. 

1  404.    Continued  conduct  of  research  and  development  activities. 
1405.  Ilearings. 


585 


Sec. 

1406.  Gifts  and  grants. 

1407.  Necessity  for  licenses  and  permits. 

1408.  Exemptions. 

1409.  Issuance  of  licenses. 

1410.  Issuance  of  permits. 

1411.  Separate  permits — Notice  of  intention. 

1412.  Contents  of  notice  of  intention. 
141.3.  Publication  of  notice  of  intention. 

1414.  Proof  of  financial  responsibility. 

1415.  Permit  fees. 

1416.  Records  and  reports. 

1416.1  Monitoring  by  United  States  Government. 

1417.  Revocation  or  suspension  of  licenses  or  permits — Modification  of  permits. 

1418.  Certain  liabilities  not  imposed  or  rights  affected. 

1419.  Penalties. 

1420.  Purpose. 

1421.  Expenditure  of  monies. 

1422.  Receipt  of  monies — Contracts. 

1423.  Call  for  election  on  weather  modification  assessment — Notice — Contents. 

1424.  Proposed  budget — Appraisers. 

1425.  Hearing  of  protests  concerning  appraisals. 

1426.  Collection  of  assessments. 

1427.  Weather  modification  fund — Reports. 
142S.  Discontinuance  of  activities. 

1429.  Essential  function  of  county  government — Disbursements. 

1430.  Liens — Tax  sales. 

1431.  Contracts  for  joint  operations. 

1432.  Construction — Codification. 

llJtOl.  Short  title 
This  act  may  be  cited  as  the  "Oklahoma  Weather  Modification  Act." 
Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  1,  eff.  April  7, 1972. 

§  l>t02.  Definitions 
As  used  in  this  act,  unless  the  context  requires  otherwise  : 

1.  "Board"  means  the  Oklahoma  Water  Resources  Board  ; 

2.  •"Operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  pursuant  of  weather  modification  and  control  activities  pursuant  to  a 
single  contract  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to  pro- 
duce, a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  specified  geographical  area  over  one 
continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  (1)  year,  or,  if  the  performance  of 
weather  modification  and  control  activities  is  to  be  undertaken  individually  or 
jointly  by  a  person  or  persons  to  be  benefited  and  not  undertaken  pursuant  to  a 
contract,  '"operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  con- 
trol activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to  pro- 
duce, a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  specified  geographical  area  over  one 
continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  (1)  year ; 

3.  "Research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration  and 
experimentation  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and 
demonstration  purposes  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of 
models,  devices,  equipment,  materials  and  processes ;  and 

4.  "Weather  modification"  or  "weather  modification  and  control"  means  chang- 
ing or  controlling,  or  attempting  to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods  the 
natural  development  of  any  or  all  atmospheric  cloud  forms  or  precipitation  forms 
which  occur  in  the  troposphere.  ( Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  2,  eff.  April  7,  1972.  Laws 
1973,  c.  ISO,  §  14,  eff.  May  To,  1973.) 

§  1403.  Poicers  of  ooard 

In  the  performance  of  the  functions  authorized  herein,  the  Board  may,  in 
addition  to  any  other  acts  authorized  by  law : 

1.  Establish  advisory  committees  to  advise  with  and  make  recommendations 
to  the  Board  concerning  legislation,  policies,  administration,  research  and  other 
matters ; 

2.  Establish  by  regulation  or  order  such  standards  and  instructions  to  govern 
the  carrying  out  of  research  or  projects  in  weather  modification  and  control  as 
the  Board  may  deem  necessary  or  desirable  to  minimize  danger  to  health  or 
property,  and  make  such  regulations  as  are  necessary  in  the  performance  of  its 
powers  and  duties ; 

3.  Make  such  studies  and  investigations,  obtain  such  information,  and  hold 
such  hearings  as  the  Board  may  deem  necessary  or  proper  to  assist  it  in  exercis- 
ing its  authority  or  in  the  administration  or  enforcement  of  this  act  or  any  reg- 
ulations or  orders  issued  thereunder ; 


586 


4.  Appoint  and  fix  the  compensation  of  such  personnel,  including  specialists 
and  consultants,  as  are  necessary  to  perform  its  duties  and  functions  hereunder ; 

5.  Acquire,  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  such  materials,  equipment  and 
facilities  as  are  necessary  to  perforin  its  duties  and  functions  hereunder  ; 

6.  Cooperate  with  public  or  private  agencies  in  the  performance  of  the  Board's 
functions  or  duties  and  in  furtherance  of  the  purposes  of  this  act ; 

7.  Represent  the  state  in  any  and  all  matters  pertaining  to  plans,  procedures 
or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  or  cooperative  agreements  relating  to 
weather  modification  and  control ; 

8.  Enter  into  cooperative  agreements  with  the  United  States  Government 
or  any  of  its  agencies,  other  states,  or  with  the  various  counties  and  cities  of 
this  state  or  with  any  private  or  public  agencies  for  conducting  weather  modifi- 
cation or  cloud  seeding  operations  ; 

9.  Act  for  and  represent  the  state  and  the  counties,  cities  and  private  or  pub- 
lic agencies  in  contracting  with  private  concerns  for  the  performance  of  weather 
modifications  or  cloud  seeding  operations  ;  and 

10.  Assist  and  cooperate  in  the  formation  of  weather  modification  districts 
within  this  state.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  3,  eff.  April  7, 1972.) 

§  1'fOJf.  Continued  conduct  of  research  and  development  activities 

The  Board  shall  exercise  its  powers  in  such  manner  as  to  promote  the  continued 
conduct  of  research  and  development  activities  in  the  fields  specified  below  by 
private  or  public  institutions  or  persons  and  to  assist  in  the  acquisition  of  an 
expanding  fund  of  theoretical  and  practical  knowledge  in  such  fields.  To  this  end 
the  Board  may  conduct,  and  make  arrangements  including  contracts  and  agree- 
ments for  the  conduct  of,  research  and  development  activities  relating  to : 

1.  The  theory  and  development  of  methods  of  weather  modification  and  con- 
trol, including  processes,  materials  and  devices  related  thereto  ; 

2.  Utilization  of  weather  modification  and  control  for  agricultural,  industrial, 
commercial,  municipal  and  other  purposes  ;  and 

3.  The  protection  of  life  and  property  during  research  and  operational  activi- 
ties. (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  4,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  UfOo.  Hearings 

In  the  case  of  hearings  held  pursuant  to  this  act,  the  Board  shall  conduct  such 
hearings  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Administrative  Procedures 
Act.1  (Laws  1972  c.228,  §  5,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  UfOG.  Gifts  and  grants 

A.  The  Board  may,  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  imposed  by  law,  re- 
ceive and  accept  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  state  any  funds  which  may  be  of- 
fered or  become  available  from  federal  grants  or  appropriations,  private  gifts, 
donations  or  bequests,  or  from  any  other  source,  and  may  expend  such  funds, 
unless  their  use  is  restricted  and  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  provided 
by  law,  for  the  administration  of  this  act  for  operations  and  research  and  for 
the  encouragement  of  research  and  development  by  a  state  or  public  or  pri- 
vate agency,  either  by  direct  grant,  by  contract  or  other  cooperative  means. 

B.  All  license  and  permit  fees  paid  to  the  Board  shall  be  deposited  in  the  Gen- 
eral Revenue  Fund  of  the  State  Treasurv.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  0,  eff.  April  7, 
1972.) 

§  1407.    Necessity  for  licenses  and  permits 

Except  as  provided  in  Section  8  of  this  act,2  no  person,  corporation  or  institution 
si i a  11  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control  except  under 
and  in  accordance  with  a  license  and  a  permit  issued  by  the  Board  authorizing 
such  activities.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  7,  eff.  April  7, 1972.) 

§  i4Q8.  Exemptions 

The  Board,  to  the  extent  it  deems  practical,  shall  provide  by  regulation  for 
exempting  from  the  license  and  permit  requirements  of  this  act : 

1,  Research  and  development  and  experiments  by  state  and  federal  agencies 
and  institutions  of  higher  learning  ; 

2.  Laboratory  research  and  experiments  ; 

:;.  Activities  normally  engaged  in  for  purposes  other  than  those  of  inducing, 
Increasing,  decreasing  or  preventing  precipitation  ;  and 


1  Section  Mm  et  s»q.  of  Title  73. 

2  Section  1408  of  this  title. 


587 


4.  Religious  ceremonies,  rites  or  acts  and  American  Indian  or  other  cultural 
ceremonies  which  do  not  utilize  chemical  or  mechanical  means  to  alter  weather 
phenomena  and  which  are  not  performed  for  profit.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  8,  eft'. 
April  7,  1972.) 

§  1409.    Issuance  of  licenses 

A.  Licenses  to  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control  shall 
be  issued  to  applicants  therefor  who  pay  the  license  fee  required  and  who 
demonstrate,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Board,  competence  in  the  field  of 
meteorology  and  financial  responsibility  reasonably  necessary  to  engage  in 
activities  for  weather  modification  and  control.  If  the  applicant  is  an  organiza- 
tion, these  requirements  shall  be  met  by  the  individual  or  individuals  who  are 
to  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  the  operation  for  the  applicant. 

B.  The  Board  shall  issue  licenses  in  accordance  with  such  procedures  and 
subject  to  such  conditions  as  it  may  by  regulation  establish  to  effectuate  the 
provisions  of  this  act.  Each  license  shall  be  issued  for  a  period  to  expire  at  the 
end  of  the  state  fiscal  year  in  which  it  is  issued  and,  if  the  licensee  possesses 
the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  a  new  license,  such  license  shall 
upon  application  be  renewed  at  the  expiration  of  such  period.  A  license  shall 
be  issued  or  renewed  only  upon  the  payment  to  the  Board  of  One  Hundred  Dol- 
lars ($100.00)  for  the  license  or  renewal  thereof.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  eff.  April 
7,  1972.). 

§  lJflO.    Issuance  of  permits 

The  Board  shall  issue  permits  in  accordance  with  such  procedures  and  subject 
to  such  conditions  as  it  may  by  regulation  establish  to  effectuate  the  provisions 
of  this  act  only  : 

1.  If  the  applicant  is  licensed  pursuant  to  this  act ; 

2.  If  a  sufficient  notice  of  intention  is  published  and  proof  of  publication  is 
filed  as  required  by  Section  13  of  this  act ; 3 

3.  If  the  fee  for  a  permit  is  paid  as  required  by  Section  15  of  this  act ; 4  and 

4.  If  the  applicant  has  given  bond  for  the  faithful  performance  of  any  weather 
modification  contract  which  the  applicant  has  entered  into  for  the  weather  modi- 
fication operation  for  which  application  was  made  for  the  permit.  The  surety 
on  any  bond  to  guarantee  the  faithful  performance  and  execution  of  any  work 
shall  be  deemed  and  held,  any  contract  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,  to  con- 
sent without  notice  to  an  extension  of  time  to  the  contractor  in  which  to  perform 
the  contract  for  a  period  of  not  more  than  thirty  (  30)  days.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228, 
§10,  eff.  April  7,  1972.). 

§14H-    Separate  permits — Xotice  of  intention 

A  separate  permit  shall  be  issued  for  each  operation.  Prior  to  undertaking  any 
weather  modification  and  control  activities  the  licensee  shall  file  with  the  Board 
and  also  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of  intention.  The  licensee,  if  a  permit  is 
issued,  shall  confine  his  activities  for  the  permitted  operation  substantially 
within  the  time  and  area  limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention,  unless  modi- 
fied by  the  Board,  and  his  activities  shall  also  conform  to  any  conditions  imposed 
by  the  Board  upon  the  issuance  of  the  permit  or  to  the  terms  of  the  permit  as 
modified  after  issuance.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  11,  eff.  April  7, 1972.) 

§  1412.    Contents  of  notice  of  intention 
The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth  at  least  all  of  the  following : 

1.  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee ; 

2.  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or  orga- 
nization on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted ; 

3.  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  operation 
will  be  conducted ; 

4.  The  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation :  and 

5.  The  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation.  (Laws 
1972,  c.  228,  §  12,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  1413.    Publication  of  notice  of  intention 

A.  The  applicant  shall  cause  the  notice  of  intention,  or  that  portion  thereof 
including  the  items  specified  in  Section  12  of  this  act,5  to  be  published  at  least 

3  Section  1413  of  this  title. 

4  Section  1415  of  this  title. 
e  Section  1412  of  this  title. 


588 


once  a  week  for  two  (2)  consecutive  weeks  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general 
circulation  and  published  within  any  county  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  con- 
ducted and  in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or,  if  the  operation  is  to  be 
conducted  in  more  than  one  county  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than 
one  county  or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  which  the  operation 
is  to  be  conducted,  then  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  pub- 
lished within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case  there  is  no  newspaper  published 
within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall  be  made  in  a  newspaper  having 
a  general  circulation  within  the  county. 

B.  Proof  of  publication  together  with  publisher's  affidavit,  shall  be  filed  by  the 
licensee  with  the  Board  within  fifteen  (15)  days  from  the  date  of  the  last 
publication  of  the  notice. 

C.  Provided,  that  upon  declaration  of  emergency  drought  conditions  within 
any  county  or  counties  of  this  state  by  proclamation  by  the  Governor  or  by 
concurrent  resolution  by  the  Legislature,  the  provisions  of  this  act  requiring 
notice  by  publication  of  intent  to  perform  any  weather  modification  operation 
may  be  suspended.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  13,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  iW.    Proof  of  financial  responsibility 

Proof  of  financial  responsibility  shall  be  furnished  by  an  applicant  by  his 
showing,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  director,  his  ability  to  respond  in  damages 
for  liability  which  might  reasonably  be  attached  to  or  result  from  his  weather 
modification  and  control  activities  in  connection  with  the  operation  for  which 
he  seeks  a  permit.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  14,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  IJflo.    Permit  fees 

The  fee  to  be  paid  by  each  applicant  for  a  permit  shall  not  exceed  Twenty-five 
Dollars  ($25.00).  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  15,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  1416.    Records  and  reports 

A.  Each  licensee  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  con- 
ducted by  him  pursuant  to  his  license  and  each  permit,  showing  the  method 
employed,  the  type  of  equipment  used,  materials  and  amounts  thereof  used,  the 
times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equipment,  the  name  and  post  office  address 
of  each  individual  participating  or  assisting  in  the  operation  other  than  the 
licensee,  and  such  other  general  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  Board, 
and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  Board  at  the  time  and  in  the  manner  required 
by  the  Board. 

B.  The  Board  shall  require  written  reports  regarding  methods  and  results, 
but  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this  act,  covering  each  operation  for 
which  a  permit  is  issued.  The  Board  shall  also  require  written  reports  from 
such  organizations  as  are  exempt  under  Section  8 6  from  the  license  and  permit 
requirements  of  this  act. 

C.  All  information  on  an  operation  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Board  before 
any  information  on  such  operation  may  be  released  to  the  public. 

D.  The  reports  and  records  in  the  custody  of  the  Board  shall  be  open  for 
public  examination  as  public  documents.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  16,  eff.  April  7, 
1972). 

§  UflG.l    Monitoring  by  United  States  Government 

When  a  permit  is  issued  under  the  Oklahoma  Weather  Modification  Act  for 
weather  modification  research  by  the  United  States  Government  or  its  agent,  any 
other  operation  for  which  a  permit  is  issued  and  which  is  located  in  full  or  in 
part  Within  the  area  of  the  permitted  research  operation  shall  submit  to  monitor- 
ing by  the  agency  conducting  such  operation  when  such  operation  is  being 
conducted.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  ISO,  §15,  eff.  May  16,  1973.) 

§  1  'ill.    Revocation  or  suspension  of  licenses  or  permits — Modification  of  permits 

A.  Under  the  provisions  of  the  Administrative  Procedures  Act,7  the  Board 
may  suspend,  revoke  or  refuse  to  renew  any  license  or  permit  issued  by  it  if  the 
applicant  no  longer  qualifies  for  such  license  or  permit  under  the  provisions  of 
this  act  or  if  the  applicant  has  violated  any  provisions  of  this  act. 

B.  The  Board  may  modify  the  terms  of  a  permit  after  issuance  thereof  if  the 
licensee  is  first  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a  hearing  respecting 
the  grounds  for  the  proposed  modification  and  if  it  appears  to  the  Board  that 
if  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  health  or  the  property  of  any  person  to 
make  the  modification  proposed.  (Laws  1972,  c.  22S,  §17,  elf.  April  7,  1972.) 


■  Section  1108  of  this  title. 

7  Section  301  et  seq.  of  Title  75. 


589 


§  1418.    Certain  liabilities  not  imposed  or  rights  affected 

Nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  impose  or  accept  any  liability  or 
responsibility  on  the  part  of  the  state  or  any  state  officials  or  employees  for  any 
weather  modification  and  control  activities  of  any  private  person  or  group,  or  to 
affect  in  any  way  any  contractual,  tortious  or  other  legal  rights,  duties  or  liabili- 
ties between  any  private  persons  or  groups.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  18,  eff.  April  7, 

1972.  ) 

§  1419.  Penalties 

Any  person  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act  or  any  lawful  regulation 
or  order  issued  pursuant  thereto  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  a  continu- 
ing violation  punishable  as  a  separate  offense  for  each  day  during  which  it 
occurs,  and  upon  conviction  shall  be  imprisoned  in  the  county  jail  for  not  more 
than  ten  (10)  days  or  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  One  Hundred  Dollars  ($100.00) 
nor  more  than  One  Thousand  Dollars  ($1,000.00),  or  by  both,  for  each  such 
separate  offense.  (Laws  1972,  c.  228,  §  19,  eff.  April  7,  1972.) 

§  1420.  Purpose 

The  Legislature  finds  that  it  is  in  the  best  interest  of  the  citizens  of  the  State 
of  Oklahoma  to  establish  a  procedure  whereby  the  orderly  conduct  of  weather 
modification  programs  can  be  administered,  controlled  and  financed  at  the  local 
level  under  the  licensing  and  permit  system  established  by  the  State  of  Oklahoma  ; 
further  determines  that  such  programs  benefit  all  citizens  alid  property  in  areas 
where  they  are  operated,  and  that  counties  are  authorized  to  finance  programs 
of  weather  modification  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  Article  10.  Section  7  of  the 
Oklahoma  Constitution.  It  is  the  intention  of  the  Legislature  that  this  act  be 
liberally  construed  so  as  to  promote  the  general  welfare  and  prosperity  of  the 
citizens  of  this  state.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  1,  eft".  May  1(5,  1973.) 

§  L',-21.    Expenditure  of  monies 

Counties,  cities,  towns,  other  local  subdivisions  of  government,  state  agencies, 
and  special  purpose  districts  may  expend  monies  for  weather  modification  and 
control  from  the  following  sources  : 

1.  General  funds  not  otherwise  obligated,  provided  that  state  agencies  may 
only  expend  funds  for  weather  modification  on  lands  owned  by  them  or  under 
their  administrative  controls  or  as  otherwise  provided  by  law: 

2.  Monies  received  by  such  entities  for  weather  modification  and  control? 
and 

3.  Monies  received  from  assessments  as  provided  in  this  act.  (Added  by  Laws 

1973,  c.  180,  §  2,  eff.  May  16,  1973.) 

§  1422.    Receipt  of  monies — Contracts 

Counties,  cities,  towns,  other  local  subdivisions  of  government,  state  agencies, 
and  special  purpose  districts  may  receive  public  and  private  donations,  pay- 
ments and  grants  for  weather  modification  and  control.  Any  of  the  foregoing 
entities  may  contract  among  themselves,  with  state  and  federal  agencies,  and 
with  private  individuals  and  entities  for  payments,  grants  and  donations  of 
money  for  weather  modification  and  control.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  3,  eff. 
May  16,  1973.) 

§  1423.  Call  for  election  on  weather  modification  assessment — Notice — Contents 

On  a  petition  signed  by  qualified  electors  equal  to  at  least  ten  percent  (10%  )  of 
the  total  number  of  votes  cast  by  county  electors  in  the  most  recent  general  elec- 
tion, or  on  their  own  motion,  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  call  an 
election  and  submit  to  the  electors  of  the  county  the  question  of  whether  or  not 
an  assessment  shall  be  levied.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  may  exempt 
areas  within  muncipalities  or  other  areas  from  the  assessment  and  may  contract 
with  such  areas  to  make  payments  in  lieu  of  assessments.  The  county  commis- 
sioners shall  exclude  from  voting  the  electors  in  those  areas  exempt  from  assess- 
ment. The  notice  of  election  shall  be  published  once  weekly  for  four  (4)  weeks  in 
a  newspaper  of  general  circulation  in  the  county.  The  notice  shall  specify  the 
election  date,  the  proposed  weather  modification  plan,  the  proposed  budget,  the 
total  amount  of  money  proposed  to  be  assessed,  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  in- 
tended to  be  used,  the  maximum  annual  assessments  proposed  to  be  levied  and  the 
number  of  years,  not  to  exceed  five  (5)  years,  for  which  the  assessment  shall  be 
authorized.  The  election  shall  be  conducted  by  the  county  election  board  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  general  election  laws  of  this  state.  The  ballots  shall  contain 
the  words  "Weather  Modification-Assessment- Yes"  and  "Weather  Modification- 


34-857—79  40 


590 


Assessment-No."  If  a  majority  of  votes  are  "Weather  Modification-Yes",  the 
countv  commissioners  shall,  at  the  time  of  the  annual  levy  thereunder,  levy  the 
assessment.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  4,  eff.  May  16,  1973.) 

§  1424.  Proposed  budget — Appraisers — Waiver  of  assessment 

Before  calling  the  election,  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  prepare  a 
proposed  budget  for  weather  modification  and  control,  which  may  include,  in 
addition  to  actual  cost  of  a  weather  modification  program,  the  cost  of  conducting 
the  election,  any  additional  costs  of  assessments  and  collection,  payment,  of  ap- 
praisers of  benefits,  costs  of  publication  of  notice  and  other  costs  incurred  by  the 
county  if  it  joins  with  other  units  of  government  in  joint  modification  programs. 
The  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  then  determine,  after  consideration  of 
other  funds  available  from  all  sources,  the  total  amount  needed  to  be  raised  by 
assessment. 

The  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  appoint  three  (3)  landowners  who  are 
residents  of  the  area  to  be  assessed,  to  act  as  appraisers  to  appraise  and  apportion 
the  benefits  and  recommend  the  assessments  to  pay  for  such  benefits.  For  such 
purpose  the  appraisers  shall  use  the  records  of  the  county  assessor.  Immediately 
after  the  appraisals  are  completed,  they  shall  file  a  written  report  with  the  board 
of  county  commissioners.  The  board  of  county  commissioners  may,  on  their  own 
motion  or  on  the  report  of  the  appraisers  and  after  adopting  a  uniform  policy, 
waive  the  levy  of  assessment,  when  the  board  or  appraisers  finds  that  the  benefits 
and  assessments  are  negligible,  are  not  justifiably  economical  to  collect  or  are 
satisfied  by  an  in  lieu  payment.  Such  waiver  of  assessment  shall  not  be  considered 
an  exemption  from  assessment  for  any  purpose,  including  the  voting  provisions 
of  the  preceding  section.  (Amended  by  Laws  1975,  c.  305.  §  1,  emerg.  eff.  June  7, 
1975.) 

§  1425.  Hearing  of  protests  concerning  appraisals 

After  an  affirmative  vote  of  electors,  the  commissioners  shall  appoint  a  time  and 
place  for  holding  a  public  hearing  to  hear  any  protests  concerning  the  appraisals. 
The  hearing  shall  be  held  after  published  notice  for  two  (2)  weeks  in  a  newspaper 
of  general  circulation  in  the  county  giving  the  date,  time  and  purpose  of  the  hear- 
ing. At  the  hearing,  the  board  of  county  comissioners  shall  have  the  authority  to 
review  and  correct  said  appraisals  and  shall  by  resolution  confirm  the  same  as  so 
revised  and  corrected  by  them.  Any  person  objecting  to  the  appraisal  of  benefits 
and  assessment  of  his  property  as  confirmed  shall  have  the  right  of  the  appeal  to 
the  district  court.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  6,  eff.  May  10,  1973.) 

§Vf26.  Collection  of  assessments 

A.  The  assessment  shall  become  due  and  shall  be  collected  at  the  same  time 
ad  valorem  taxes  are  due  and  collected.  Such  annual  levy  shall  be  certified  not 
later  than  October  1  of  each  year  to  the  county  treasurer  of  the  county  in  which 
the  property  is  situated.  The  certificate  shall  be  substantially  as  hereinafter 
provided. 

B.  The  certificate  shall  set  forth  a  table  or  schedule  showing  in  properly  ruled 
columns : 

1.  The  names  of  the  owners  of  the  property  to  be  assessed ; 

2.  The  description  of  the  property  opposite  the  names  of  the  owners  ; 

3.  The  total  amount  of  the  annual  assessment  on  the  property  : 

4.  The  total  amount  of  all  delinquent  assessments  ; 

5.  The  tolal  assessment  against  the  land  for  the  year  ; 

6.  A  blank  column  in  which  the  county  treasurer  shall  record  the  amounts 
collected  ; 

7.  A  blank  column  in  which  the  county  treasurer  shall  record  the  date  of 
payment;  and 

s.  A  blank  column  in  which  the  county  treasurer  shall  report  the  name  of 
the  person  who  paid. 

C.  The  certificate  and  report  shall  be  prepared  in  triplicate  in  a  book  named 

"Assessment  Book  of  Weather  Modification,  County,  Oklahoma".  This 

name  shall  also  be  printed  at  the  top  of  each  page. 

I).  Two  (2)  copies  of  the  certificate  shall  be  forwarded  to  the  county  treasurer 
of  the  county  wherein  the  land  is  located.  The  county  treasurer  shall  receive  the 
certificate  as  a  special  assessment  book,  and  shall  certify  it  as  other  special  assess- 
ment records  and  shall  collect  the  assessment  according  to  law.  The  special  assess- 
ment book  shall  be  treasurer's  warrant  and  authority  to  demand  and  receive 
the  assessment  due;  and  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  county  treasurer  to  accept 
payment  of  the  ad  valorem  taxes  levied  against  any  property  described  therein 


591 


until  the  owner  has  been  notified  that  there  is  a  special  assessment  noted  in  the 
special  assessment  book.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  7,  eff.  May  16, 1973.) 

§  1427.  Weather  modification  fund — Reports 

The  county  treasurer  shall  establish  a  weather  modification  fund  and  shall  de- 
posit all  monies  collected  from  assessments,  grants,  donations  or  other  sources  for 
weather  modification  purposes  and  make  monthly  reports  of  the  sums  collected  to 
the  board  or  county  commissioners.  The  county  treasurer  shall  make  a  report  to 
the  commissioners  immediately  after  October  31  of  each  year  of  the  sums  collected 
and  of  the  assessments  not  collected.  AH  assessments  remaining  unpaid  after  they 
become  due  and  collectible  shall  be  delinquent  and  bear  a  penalty  in  the  same 
manner  as  ad  valorem  taxes.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  8,  eff.  May  16,  1973.) 

§  1  ',2S.  Discontinuance  of  activities 

If  a  county  ceases  to  be  involved  in  weather  modification  activities,  any  un- 
expended funds  in  the  weather  modification  fund  shall  be  invested  in  interest- 
bearing  obligations  of  the  United  States  Government  until  weather  modification 
activities  are  resumed,  with  the  interest  therefrom  credited  to  the  weather  modifi- 
cation fund.  If,  after  five  (5)  years,  the  county  has  not  resumed  activity  in  weather 
modification,  the  board  of  county  commissioners  shall  transfer  said  unexpended 
funds  collected  by  assessment,  with  interest  accrued,  to  a  sinking  fund  of  the 
county,  to  reduce  bonded  indebtedness,  and  the  board  of  county  commissioners 
shall  refund,  on  a  pro  rata  basis,  monies  from  other  sources.  (Added  by  Laws 
1973,  c.  180,  §  9,  eff.  May  16, 1973.) 

§  1429.  Essential  f  unction  of  county  government — Disbursements 

The  weather  modification  activities  herein  authorized  shall  be  deemed  to  be  an 
essential  function  of  county  government.  All  disbursements  from  the  weather 
modification  fund  shall  be  made  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  and  pro- 
cedures for  disbursement  from  the  county  general  fund.  All  records  required  to 
be  maintained  as  to  disbursements  from  the  county  general  fund  shall  likewise 
be  maintained  on  disbursements  from  the  weather  modification  fund.  (Added  bv 
Laws  1973.  c.  180,  §  10.  eff.  May  16, 1973. ) 

§  UfW.  Liens — Tax  sales 

All  assessments  and  all  costs  and  expenses  of  collecting  delinquent  assessments 
shall  constitute  a  lien  on  the  property  against  which  the  assessments  have  been 
levied.  Such  lien  shall  attach  on  the  date  which  the  assessment  certificate  is  filed 
in  the  office  of  the  county  treasurer  and  shall  continue  until  paid.  Such  lien  shall 
have  the  same  priority  as  a  lien  created  by  delinquent  ad  valorem  taxes,  all  other 
taxes  and  special  assessments.  Delinquent  assessments  shall  be  collected  by  the 
county  treasurer  in  the  same  manner  and  at  the  same  time  as  delinquent  ad 
valorem  taxes  are  collected.  Any  tax  sale  shall  include  all  costs  incurred  due  to 
said  sale,  and  such  lien  may  be  evidenced  by  any  ad  valorem  tax  sale  certificate 
including  said  charge  substantially  in  the  form  required  by  law. 

Unless  expressly  declared  to  the  contrary,  no  warranty  deed  or  deed  made 
pursuant  to  a  judicial  sale  shall  warrant  against  any  portion  of  any  assessment 
or  assessments  levied  hereunder  except  installments  due  before  the  date  of  such 
deed.  (Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  11,  eff.  May  16,  1973.) 

§  1431.  Contracts  for  joint  operations 

Counties  may  contract  with  other  counties  and  other  local  subdivisions  of  gov- 
ernment and  state  and  federal  agencies  to  engage  in  joint  weather  modification 
operations.  All  such  contracts  shall  be  filed  with  and  approved  by  the  Board. 
(Added  by  Laws  1973,  c.  180,  §  12,  eff.  May  16,  1973.) 

§  1432.  Construction — Codification 

This  act  shall  be  construed  as  part  of  the  Oklahoma  Weather  Modification  Act, 
and  Sections  1  through  12  of  this  act  shall  be  codified  as  a  part  thereof.  (Added  by 
Laws  1973.  c.  180,  §  13,  eff.  May  16, 1973.) 

Oregon 

Oregon  Rev.  Stat.  §§558.010-558.990;  451.010;  451.420 

Weather  Modification 
Licensing 

558.010    Definitions  for  ORS  558.010  to  558.140. 
558.020    Purpose  of  ORS  558.10  to  558.140  and  558.990. 


592 


Artificial  weather  modification  prohibited  without  license. 
.Application  for  license  ;  fee. 

Applicant  to  file  proof  of  financial  responsibility. 
Hearing  an  application  for  license. 

Issuance  of  license  ;  conditions  ;  licensee's  authority  ;  use  of  improper  materials 

cause  for  suspension  or  revocation  :  renewal. 
Governmental  entities  conducting  weather  modification  at  airport  exempted. 
Contents  of  hearing  notice. 
Publication  of  notice  of  hearing. 
Troof  of  publication. 

Records  and  reports  of  operations  ;  public  examination. 
Emergency  licenses. 

Revocation,  suspension,  refusal  to  issue  or  renew  license  ;  procedure. 
Appropriation  for  administration  and  enforcement. 

Weather  Modification  Districts  (General  Provisions) 

"County  court"  defined. 
Initiative  and  referendum. 

(Incorporation) 

Incorporation  for  weather  modification  ;  limitations  as  to  area. 
Forest  lands  not  benefited  property  ;  not  included  in  district  except  upon  petition. 
Time  for  formation  election. 
Commissioners  of  first  board  :  qualifications. 
Certificates  of  election  for  commissioners. 

(Powers  of  District) 

General  powers  of  district. 

Limitation  on  right  to  own  or  operate  equipment. 
Regulations  concerning  district  property. 
Duty  to  carry  liability  insurance. 
Cooperative  agreements  between  districts. 
Tax  assessment,  levy  and  collection. 

Disposal  of  taxes  levied  when  organization  declared  invalid. 
Employes'  retirement  system  authorized. 
1  ustrict  to  budget  for  retirement  system. 
Employee  contribution. 
Limitation  on  membership. 

(Board  of  Commissioners) 

Powers  of  district  in  board  ;  qualifications,  terms  and  election  of  commissioners. 
Board  meeting  ;  officers  ;  quorum  ;  employing  assistance  :  employee  benefits. 
Increasing  number  of  commissioners. 

Deposit  and  withdrawal  of  moneys  ;  annual  reports  ;  records. 
Calling  special  elections. 

Penalties 

Penalties. 

Licensing 

558.010  Definitions  for  ORS  558.010  to  558.11,0.  As  used  in  ORS  55S.010  to 
558.140  and  558.090 : 

(1)  "Department"  means  the  State  Department  of  Agriculture. 

(2)  "Person"  includes  any  public  or  private  corporation.  [1053  c.654  s.l :  1055 
c.61  s.4] 

558.020  Purpose  of  ORS  558.010  to  558.11,0  and  558.990.  The  purpose  of  ORS 
558.010  to  558.140  and  558.990  is  to  promote  the  public  health,  safety  and  well  are 
by  providing  for  the  licensing,  regulation  and  control  of  interference  by  artificial 
means  with  the  natural  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water  in  any 
form  contained  in  the  atmosphere.  ri953  c.654  s.2] 

558.030  Artificial  weather  modification  prohibited  without  license.  Xo  person, 
without  securing  a  license  from  the  department,  shall  cause  or  attempt  to  cause 
by  artificial  means  condensation  or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow.  hail,  moisture  or 
water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere,  or  shall  prevent  or  attempt  to 
prevent  by  artificial  means  the  natural  condensation  or  precipitation  of  rain, 
snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere.  [1053 
c.654  s.3] 

558.01,0  Application  for  license;  fee.  (1)  Any  person  desiring  to  do  any  of  the 
acts  specified  in  ORS  558.030  shall  file  with  the  department  an  application  for  a 
license  on  a  form  to  be  supplied  by  the  department  for  such  purpose  setting  forth 
All  of  the  following : 

(a)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  applicant. 

(b)  The  education,  experience  and  qualifications  of  the  applicant,  or  if  the 
applicant  is  not  an  individual,  the  education,  experience  and  qualifications  of 
the  persons  who  will  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  the  operation  of  the 
applicant. 

(c)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  person  on  whose  behalf  the 
weather  modification  operation  is  to  be  conducted  if  other  than  the  applicant. 


593 


(d)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  weather  modification  operation  which 
applicant  proposes  to  conduct,  including  a  general  description  of  such  opera- 
tion and  the  manner  in  which  the  production,  management  or  conservation 
of  water  or  energy  resources  or  agricultural  or  forest  crops  could  be  benefited 
by  the  operation. 

(e)  The  method  and  type  of  equipment  and  the  type  and  composition  of 
the  materials  that  the  applicant  proposes  to  use. 

(f)  Such  other  pertinent  information  as  the  department  may  require. 

(2)  Each  application  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  filing  fee  in  the  sum  of  $100, 
and  proof  of  financial  responsibility  as  required  by  ORS  558.050.  [1953  c.654  s.4 ; 
1975  c.420  s.l] 

558.050  Applicant  to  file  proof  of  financial  responsibility.  (1)  No  license  shall 
be  issued  to  any  person  until  he  has  filed  with  the  department  proof  of  ability  to 
respond  in  damages  for  liability  on  account  of  accidents  arising  out  of  the 
weather  modification  operations  to  be  conducted  by  him  in  the  amount  of  $100,000 
because  of  bodily  injury  to  or  death  of  one  person  resulting  from  any  one  acci- 
dent, and,  subject  to  said  limit  for  one  person,  in  the  amount  of  $300,000  because 
of  bodily  injury  to  or  death  of  two  or  more  persons  resulting  from  any  one  acci- 
dent, and  in  the  amount  of  $300,000  because  of  injury  to  or  destruction  of  proper- 
ty of  others  resulting  from  any  one  accident. 

(2)  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  may  be  given  by  filing  with  the  depart- 
ment a  certificate  of  insurance  or  a  bond  or  a  certificate  of  deposit  of  money  in 
the  same  manner  and  with  the  same  effect  as  provided  by  ORS  chapter  486.  [1953 
c.654  s.13;  1975  c.420  s.la] 

558.055  Hearing  on  application  for  license.  Upon  receipt  of  an  application  for 
a  license,  the  department  shall  fix  the  time  and  place  for  a  public  hearing  on  the 
application.  Such  hearing  shall  be  held  in  the  county  seat  of  any  county  in  which 
the  proposed  operation  will  be  conducted.  The  department  shall  notify  the  appli- 
cant of  the  time  and  place  of  hearing  in  sufficient  time  for  the  applicant  to  com- 
ply with  the  notice  requirements  of  ORS  558.080  to  558.100.  [1975  c.420  s.3] 

558.060  Issuance  of  license;  conditions ;  licensee's  authority ;  use  of  improper 
materials  cause  for  suspension  of  revocation;  renewal.  (1)  The  department  shall 
act  within  30  days,  but  shall  only  issue  the  license  upon  finding  that : 

(a)  The  applicant  is  qualified  to  undertake  the  weather  modification  opera- 
tion proposed  in  his  application  ; 

(b)  The  production,  management  or  conservation  of  water  or  energy 
resources  or  agricultural  or  forest  crops  could  be  benefited  by  the  proposed 
weather  modification  operation  ;  and 

(c)  The  proposed  weather  modification  operation  would  not  be  injurious  to 
the  public  health  or  safety. 

(2)  Each  such  license  shall  entitle  the  licensee  to  conduct  the  operations 
described  in  the  license  for  one  year  from  the  date  the  license  is  issued  unless  the 
license  is  sooner  revoked  or  suspended.  The  conducting  of  any  weather  modifica- 
tion operation  or  the  use  of  any  equipment  or  materials  other  than  those  described 
in  the  license  shall  be  cause  for  revocation  or  suspension  of  the  license. 

(3)  The  license  may  be  renewed  annually  by  payment  of  a  filing  fee  in  the 
sum  of  $50.  If  the  application  for  renewal  proposes  any  change  in  the  previously 
licensed  operation,  or  if  the  department  determines  that  the  public  health  or 
safety  may  be  adversely  affected  by  continuation  of  the  operation,  the  department 
shall  conduct  a  hearing  on  the  application  for  renewal.  The  provisions  of  ORS 
558.055  and  55S.0S0  to  55S.100  shall  apply  to  such  hearing.  [1953  c.654  s.5 ; 
1975  c.420  s.41 

558.065  [1965  c.336  s.2 ;  repealed  by  1967  c.225  s.l  (558.066  enacted  in  lieu  of 
558.0;  55)] 

558.066  Governmental  entities  conducting  weather  modification  at  airport 
exempted.  The  State  of  Oregon  or  its  agencies,  counties,  cities,  public  corpora- 
tions or  political  subdivisions  thereof  or  any  person  engaged  by  any  of  them  for 
the  purpose  of  removing  or  dispersing  fog,  or  carrying  out  or  performing  any 
other  weather  modification  at  an  airport  owned  or  operated  by  the  State  of 
Oregon  or  its  agencies,  counties,  cities,  public  corporations  or  political  subdi- 
visions thereof,  are  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  ORS  55S.010  to  55S.140  and 
558.990  in  respect  to  such  operations  at  such  airport  only.  [1967  c.225  s.2  (enacted 
in  lieu  of  558.065)  1 

558.070  [1953  c.654  s.6  ;  repealed  by  1975  c.420  s.12] 

558.080  Contents  of  hearing  notice.  The  notice  of  hearing  shall  set  forth  all  of 
the  following: 

(1)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  applicant. 


594 


(2)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  person  on  whose  behalf  the  weather 
modification  operation  is  to  be  conducted  if  other  than  the  applicant. 

(3)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  weather  modification  operation  which  apppli- 
cant  proposes  to  conduct,  including  a  general  description  of  such  operation. 

(4)  The  method  and  type  of  equipment  and  the  type  of  composition  of  the 
materials  that  the  applicant  proposes  to  use. 

(5)  The  area  in  which  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  operation  will 
be  conducted. 

(6)  The  area  which  will  be  affected  by  the  operation  as  near  as  the  same  may 
be  determined  in  advance. 

(7)  The  time  and  place  of  the  public  hearing.  [1953  c.654  s.7 ;  1975  c.420  s.5] 
558.090  Publication  of  notice  of  hearing.  The  applicant  shall  cause  the  notice  of 

hearing  to  be  published  at  least  once  a  week  for  two  consecutive  weeks  in  a  news- 
paper having  a  general  circulation  and  published  within  the  county  wherein  the 
proposed  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  which  the  affected  area  is  located, 
or  if  the  proposed  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in  more  than  one  county  or  if  the 
affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one  county  or  is  located  in  a  county  other 
than  the  one  in  which  the  proposed  operation  is  to  be  conducted,  then  such  notice 
shall  be  published  in  like  manner  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and 
published  within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case  there  is  no  newspaper  published 
within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall  be  made  in  a  newspaper  having 
a  general  circulation  within  the  county.  The  date  of  last  publication  shall  be  not 
less  than  three  nor  more  than  10  days  prior  to  the  date  set  for  hearing.  [1953 
c.654  s.8  ;  1975  c.  420  s.6] 

558.100  Proof  of  publication.  Proof  of  publication  shall  be  filed  by  the  applicant 
with  the  department  at  the  time  of  the  hearing.  Proof  of  publication  shall  be  by 
copy  of  the  notice  as  published,  attached  to  and  made  a  part  of  the  affidavit  of  the 
publisher  or  foreman  of  the  newspaper  publishing  the  notice.  [1953  c.654  s.9  ;  1975 
c.420  s.7] 

558.110  Record*  and  reports  of  operations ;  public  examination.  (1)  Each  licen- 
see shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  conducted  by  him  pursuant 
to  his  license  showing  the  method  employed,  the  type  of  equipment,  the  type  and 
'composition  of  the  materials  used,  the  times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equip- 
ment, the  name  and  post-office  address  of  each  person  participating  or  assisting  in 
the  operation  other  than  the  licensee,  the  estimated  precipitation  for  each  licensed 
project,  defining  the  gain  or  loss  occurring  from  the  operations,  together  with  sup- 
porting data  therefor,  and  such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  de- 
partment, and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  department  at  such  times  as  it  may 
require. 

(2)  The  records  of  the  department  and  the  reports  of  all  licensees  shall  be  avail- 
able for  public  examination.  [1953  c.654  s.10  ;  1975  c.420  s.8] 

558.120  Emergency  licenses.  Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  ORS  558.010  to 
558.140  and  558.990  to  the  contrary,  the  department  may  grant  a  license  permit- 
ting a  weather  modification  operation  without  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the 
provisions  of  ORS  558.055  and  558.080  to  558.100,  if  the  operation  appears  to  the 
•department  to  be  necessary  or  desirable  in  aid  of  extinguishment  of  fires,  dis- 
persal of  fog.  or  other  similar  emergency.  [1953  c.654  s.  11 ;  1975  c.430  s.  9] 

558.130  [1953  c.654  s.  12  ;  repealed  by  1975  c.420  s.12] 

558.135  Revocation,  suspension,  refusal  to  issue  or  renew  license;  procedure. 
CI)  Where  the  department  proposes  to  refuse  to  issue  or  renew  a  license,  or  pro- 
poses to  revoke  or  suspend  a  license,  opportunity  for  hearing  shall  be  accorded  as 
provided  in  ORS  183.310  to  183.500. 

(2)  Promulgation  of  rules,  conduct  of  hearings,  issuance  of  orders  and  judicial 
review  of  rules  and  orders  shall  be  in  accordance  with  ORS  183.310  to  1S3.500. 
[1975  c.420  B.11] 

558.1  £0  Appropriation  for  administration  and  enforcement.  All  moneys  received 
by  the  department  under  ORS  558.010  to  558.140  and  558.990.  in  addition  to  any 
other  appropriation  of  funds  available  for  the  administration  of  ORS  558.010  to 
658.1  10  ;iik1  558. 990,  hereby  are  continuously  appropriated  to  the  department  for 
tbo  purpose  of  defraying  the  costs  and  expenses  incurred  in  the  administration 
and  enforcement  of  ORS  558.010  to  558.140  and  558.990.  [1955  c.6  s.3] 

Weather  Modification  Districts 

(General  Provisions) 

558.200  "County  court"  defined.  As  used  in  ORS  558.200  to  558.440.  "county 
court"  Includes  board  of  county  commissioners.  [1969  c. 698  s.l] 


558.205  Initiative  and  referendum.  In  the  exercise  of  initiative  and  referendum 
powers  reserved  under  the  Constitution  of  this  state  to  the  legal  voters  of  every 
municipality  and  district  as  to  all  local,  special  and  municipal  legislation  of  every 
sort  and  character  in  and  for  their  respective  municipalities  and  districts,  the 
general  laws  of  the  state  as  applied  to  cities  and  towns  shall  govern  in  these 
districts.  The  chairman  of  the  commissioners  shall  act  as  mayor  and  perform  his 
duties,  the  secretary  shall  perform  the  duties  of  auditor  or  recorder,  the  attorney 
shall  perform  the  duties  of  city  attorney,  and  if  there  is  no  attorney,  the  secretary 
shall  perform  the  duties  required  of  the  attorney.  [1969  c.698  s.35  ;  1975  c.647  s.47] 

(Incorporation) 

558.210  Incorporation  for  weather  modification ;  limitations  as  to  area.  Any 
designated  area  within  a  county  bordering  the  Columbia  River  and  having  a 
population  of  less  than  21.000,  according  to  the  latest  federal  decennial  census, 
or  within  two  or  more  of  such  counties,  may  be  incorporated  as  a  weather  niodifi- 
cati<  »n  district  for  the  purpose  of  : 

(1)  Causing  or  attempting  to  cause  by  artificial  means  condensation  or  precip- 
itation of  rain,  snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the 
atmosphere ;  or 

(2)  Preventing  or  attempting  to  prevent  by  artificial  means  the  natural  con- 
densation or  precipitation  of  rain.  snow,  hail,  moisture  or  water  in  any  form 
contained  in  the  atmosphere.  [1969  c.698  s.3] 

55S.215[1969  c.698  s.4  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 
538.220 [1969  c.  698  s.17  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 
558.225 [1969  c.698  s.5  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 
558.230[1969  c.698  s.6a  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.235  Forest  lands  not  benefited  properly:  not  included  in  district  except 
upon  petition.  Forest  lands  within  a  forest  protection  district  as  defined  in  ORS 
chapter  477,  shall  not  be  considered  benefited  property  and  shall  not  be  included 
in  a  weather  modification  district  unless  the  owner  of  the  forest  lands  petitions* 
the  county  court  having  jurisdiction  of  the  formation  proceedings  to  have  his 
lands  included.  [1969  c.698  s.6  ;  1971  c.727  s.173] 

55S.240[1969  c.698  s.20 ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558:245  Time  for  formation  election.  An  election,  if  any  is  held,  on  formation 
shall  be  held  at  the  same  time  as  the  next  succeeding  state-wide  primary  or 
general  election.  [1969  c.698  s.7  ;  1971  c.727  s.175] 

558.250[1969  c.698  s.8  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.647  s.149] 

558.255  Commissioners  of  first  board;  qualifications.  At  the  election  on  forma- 
tion, commissioners  to  serve  as  the  first  board  of  the  district  shall  be  elected. 
Commissioners  shall  be  owners  of  the  land  within  the  district  but  need  not  reside 
within  the  district.  [1969  c.698  s.9  :  1971  c.647  s.125] 

558.260  [1969  c.698  ss.10, 11, 12, 16  :  repealed  by  1971  c.647  s.149] 

">S.265[1969  c.698  s.13  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.270  Certificates  of  election  for  commissioners.  The  county  court  shall  also 
canvass  the  votes  for  commissioners  and  cause  the  county  clerk  to  issue  certifi- 
cates of  election  to  the  number  named  in  the  petition  for  formation  who  received 
the  highest  number  of  votes.  [1969  c.698  s.14] 

558,275[1969  c.698  s.15  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

(Powers  of  District) 

558.300  General  powers  of  district.  After  the  date  of  formation,  a  district  shall 
make  all  contracts,  hold  and  receive  and  dispose  of  real  and  personal  property 
within  and  without  its  described  boundaries  and  do  all  other  acts  and  things 
which  may  be  requisite,  necessary  or  convenient  in  carrying  out  the  objects  of 
the  district  or  exercising  the  powers  conferred  upon  it  as  in  ORS  558.200  to 
558.440  set  out  and  expressed,  sue  and  be  sued,  plead  and  be  impleaded  in  all 
actions  and  suits  or  other  proceedings  brought  bv  or  against  it.  [1969  c.698  s.18; 
1971  c.727  s.177] 

558.310  Limitation  on  right  to  own  or  operate  equipment.  No  weather  modifi- 
cation district  shall  own  or  operate  airplanes,  chemicals  or  other  equipment  or 
appliances  for  weather  modification  activities,  but  must  when  conducting 
weather  modification  activities  hire  a  person  licensed  under  the  provisions  of 
ORS  558.010  to  558.140  and  588.990.  [1969  c.698  s.60] 

558.315  Regulations  concerning  district  property.  Any  weather  modification  dis- 
trict may  adopt  and  promulgate  rules  and  regulations  concerning  the  use  of  the 
property  of  the  district.  [1969  c.698  s.27] 


596 


558.320,  Duty  to  carry  liability  insurance.  A  weather  modification  distrcit  shall 
obtain  not  later  than  the  60th  day  after  the  date  of  the  election  forming  such 
district  and  before  beginning  any  weather  modification  activities  liability  insur- 
ance coverage  of  not  less  than  $500,000  bodly  injury  and  $500,000  property  dam- 
age, to  reimburse  persons  for  damages  arising  from  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities. [1960  c.69S  s.61] 

558.325  Cooperative  agreements  between  districts.  Weather  modification  dis- 
tricts organized  under  ORS  558.200  to  558.440  may  enter  into  cooperative  agree- 
ments or  control  of  facilities  for  weather  modification.  [1969  c.698  s.28] 

558.330[1969  c.698  s.40;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.340  Tax  assessment,  levy  and  collection.  (1)  The  district  may  assess,  levy 
and  collect  taxes  each  year  not  to  exceed  one-fourth  of  one  percent  (.0025)  of 
the  true  cash  value  of  all  taxable  property  within  the  limits  of  the  district, 
computed  in  accordance  with  ORS  308.207.  The  proceeds  the  tax  shall  be  applied 
by  it  in  carrying  out  the  objects  and  purposes  of  ORS  558.210  to  588.270,  558,300 
and  558.345  and  for  the  purpose  of  financing  the  employes'  retirement  system. 

(2)  Any  such  taxes  needed  shall  be  levied  in  each  year  and  returned  to  the 
county  officer  whose  duty  it  is  to  extend  the  tax  roll  by  the  time  required  by  law 
for  city  taxes  to  be  levied  and  returned. 

(3)  All  taxes  levied  by  the  district  shall  become  payable  at  the  same  time  and 
be  collected  by  the  same  officer  who  collects  county  taxes,  and  shall  be  turned 
over  to  the  district  according  to  law.  The  county  officer  whose  duty  it  is  to 
extend  the  county  levy  shall  extend  the  levy  of  the  district  in  the  same  manner 
as  city  taxes  are  extended. 

(4)  Property  shall  be  subject  to  sale  for  nonpayment  of  taxes  levied  by  the 
district  in  like  manner  and  with  like  effect  as  in  the  case  of  county  and  state 
taxes.  [1969  c.698  s.26  ;  1971  c.727  s.178] 

558.345  Disposal  of  taxes  levied  when  organization  declared  invalid.  When  an 
attempt  has  been  made  to  organize  a  district  under  the  provisions  of  ORS  558.200 
to  :~5S.440  and  subsequently  by  a  decree  of  a  court  of  competent  jurisdiction  it 
has  been  declared  that  the  organization  is  invalid,  but  prior  to  such  decree  the 
invalid  organization  has  levied  taxes,  the  funds  derived  from  the  levy  shall  be 
disposed  of  as  follows  : 

(1)  If  the  area  embraced  in  the  invalid  organization  is  embraced  in  a  subse- 
quently created  organization  composed  of  unincorporated  or  incorporated  terri- 
tory, or  combinations  thereof,  for  the  purpose  of  weather  modification,  the  cus- 
todian of  the  taxes  collected  for  the  invalid  organization  shall  turn  them  over 
to  the  subsequent  organization  to  be  used  only  for  the  purpose  of  weather 
modification. 

(2)  If  the  subsequent  organization  does  not  embrace  all  territory  embraced  in 
the  invalid  organization,  such  taxes  as  have  been  collected  from  the  levy  upon 
property  in  areas  not  embraced  in  the  subsequent  organization  shall  be  refunded 
to  the  payers  thereof  by  the  custodian  of  the  taxes  before  the  balance  is  turned 
over  to  the  subsequent  organization. 

(3)  If  no  such  subsequent  organization  is  created  for  weather  modification, 
within  a  period  of  two  years  after  the  entry  of  the  decree  of  invalidation,  the 
taxes  collected  shall  be  refunded  by  the  custodian  of  them  to  the  taxpayers  who 
paid  them.  [1969  c.698  s.19] 

558.850  Employes'  retirement  system  authorized.  (1)  A  weather  modification 
district  organized  under  ORS  558.200  to  558.440  may  establish  an  employes'  re- 
tirement system.  The  commissioners  may  enter  into  agreements  necessary  to 
establish  the  system  and  carry  out  the  plan  and  may  agree  to  modifications  of 
such  agreements  from  time  to  time. 

(2)  The  retirement  plan  may  provide  for  retirement  benefits  measured  on  the 
basis  of  services  rendered  or  to  be  rendered  by  an  employe,  either  before  or  after 
the  date  on  which  such  employe  first  becomes  a  member  of  the  retirement  plan. 
The  retirement  plan  may  provide  for  a  minimum  of  years  of  service  and  a  mini- 
mum and  maximum  age  of  retirement  for  the  employe.  [1969  c.OOX  s.561 

558.355  District  to  budget  for  retirement  system.  The  district  may  budget  and 
provide  for  payment  info  the  fund  of  the  retirement  plan  an  amount  sufficient: 

(3  )  To  provide  on  an  actuarial  reserve  basis  the  amortized  level  premium  cost 
o'*  Hie  retirement  benefits  which,  under  the  provision  of  the  retirement  system, 
arc  to  be  provided  by  the  district  to  its  employes  who  attain  the  retirement  age 
Or  retire  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  retirement  plan. 

C2)  To  meet  the  actuarially  computed  costs  of  retirement  benefits  measured 
on  the  basis  of  services  rendered  or  to  be  rendered  by  an  employe  before  or  after 


597 


the  date  on  which  such  employe  becomes  a  member  of  the  retirement  plan.  [1969 
c.698  s.57] 

558.360  Employee  contribution.  The  district  may  collect,  as  a  contribution  from 
any  employe,  that  percentage  of  the  salary  received  by  the  employe  which  is 
necessary  to  fund  on  an  actuarial  reserve  basis  the  cost  of  retirement  benefits 
which  the  employe  is  required  to  provide  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  a  retire- 
ment plan.  [1969  c.698  s.58] 

558.365  Limitation  on  membership.  Nothing  in  ORS  558.200  to  558.440  author- 
izes the  district  to  budget,  provide  for  payments  or  collect  contributions  to  fund 
retirement  benefits  for  an  individual  who  is  not  in  the  employment  of  the  district 
at  the  time  of  the  creation  of  a  membership  status  under  a  retirement  plan.  [1969 
c.698  s.59] 

(Board  of  Commissioners) 

558400  Powers  of  district  in  board;  qualifications,  terms  and  election  of  com- 
missioners. (1)  The  power  and  authority  given  to  districts  organized  under  ORS 
558.200  to  558.440  except  as  therein  otherwise  provided  is  vested  in  and  shall  be 
exercised  by  a  board  of  commissioners  of  the  number  named  in  the  petition  for 
formation,  but  not  more  than  five,  each  of  whom  shall  be  a  qualified  voter  and 
freeholder  within  the  district.  Except  as  provided  in  subsection  (2)  of  this 
section,  directors  shall  serve  for  four-year  terms. 

(2)  Within  10  days  after  issuance  of  the  formation  order,  the  number  of  com- 
missioners named  in  the  petition  for  formation  who  received  the  highest  vote 
at  the  election  for  formation  shall  meet  and  organize,  first  taking  and  subscribing 
an  oath  of  office  to  the  effect  that  they  will  support  the  Constitutions  of  the 
United  States  and  of  this  state  and  the  laws  thereof,  and  will  discharge  faithfully 
the  duties  of  commissioner  to  the  best  of  their  ability.  They  shall  determine  by 
lot  the  length  of  term  each  shall  hold  office.  If  there  is  an  odd  number  of  com- 
missioners, a  majority  shall  have  a  term  expiring  four  years  after  the  July  1 
immediately  following  the  election  and  a  minority  shall  have  a  term  expiring 
two  years  after  the  July  1  immediately  following  the  election.  If  there  is  an  even 
number  of  commissioners,  the  commissioners  shall  be  divided  into  two  equal 
groups  as  to  terms.  One  group  shall  have  a  term  expiring  four  years  after  the 
July  1  immediately  following  the  election  and  the  other  group  shall  have  a  term 
expiring  two  years  after  the  July  1  immediately  following  the  election. 

(3)  A  general  election  shall  be  held  in  the  district,  on  the  date  fixed  by  ORS 
259.240,  for  the  election  of  a  commissioner  to  succeed  a  commissioner  whose  term 
expires  the  following  July  1,  and  to  elect  commissioners  to  fill  any  vacancy  which 
then  may  exist.  At  all  elections  the  voters  shall  have  the  qualifications  of  electors 
of  this  state  and  shall  have  resided  in  the  territory  embraced  in  the  district  for 
at  least  90  days  preceding  the  election.  [1969  c.698  s.29;  1971  c.727  s.179;  1973 
c.796  s.71 :  1975  c.647  s.48] 

558.405  [1969  c.698  s.33 ;  repealed  by  1971  c.23  s.12] 

558.JflO  Board  meetings;  officers;  quorum;  employing  assistance;  employe 
benefits.  (1)  The  commissioners  shall  hold  meetings  at  such  time  and  place 
within  the  district  as  they  may  determine  upon.  Such  meetings  must  be  open  to 
the  public.  They  shall  hold  at  least  one  regular  meeting  in  each  month  on  a  day 
to  be  fixed  by  them,  and  may  hold  special  meetings  under  such  rules  as  they  may 
make. 

(2)  The  commissioners  shall,  at  the  time  of  their  organization,  choose  from 
their  number  a  chairman,  a  secretary  and  a  treasurer,  who  shall  hold  their  offices 
until  the  first  regular  meeting  in  July,  or  until  their  successors  are  elected  and 
qualified.  These  officers  shall  have,  respectively,  the  powers  and  shall  perform 
the  duties  usual  in  such  cases  and  shall  be  known  as  the  president,  secretary  and 
treasurer  of  the  district.  A  majority  shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business 
and,  in  the  absence  of  the  chairman,  any  other  member  may  preside  at  any 
meeting. 

(3)  The  commissioners  may  employ  such  engineers,  superintendents,  mechan- 
ics, clerks  or  other  persons  as  they  may  find  requisite,  necessary  or  convenient 
in  carrying  on  any  work  of  the  district  and  at  such  rate  of  remuneration 
as  they  may  deem  just. 

(4)  The  commissioners  may  provide  life  insurance  and  retirement  or  pension 
plans  for  employees  of  a  weather  modification  district,  provided  the  insurer 
issuing  such  policy  is  licensed  to  do  business  in  the  State  of  Oregon.  [1969  c.698 
s.31 :  1971  c.23  s.ll ;  1971  c.403  s.13 ;  1973  c.796  s.72] 

558.415  Increasing  number  of  commissioners.  (1)  If  the  numbers  of  commis- 
sioners in  a  particular  district  is  less  than  five.  then,  upon  receipt  of  petitions 
containing  the  names  of  not  less  than  25  electors  in  the  district  and  requesting 


598 


that  an  election  be  held  iu  the  district  on  the  proposition  of  increasing  the  num- 
ber of  commissioners  to  five  and  nominating  a  candidate  or  candidates  for  each 
additional  position,  each  of  whom  shall  be  a  qualified  voter  and  freeholder 
within  the  district,  the  commissioners  may,  at  their  discretion,  call  a  special 
election  of  the  electors  of  the  district  to  vote  on  the  proposition  and  on  the 
candidates.  The  election  shall  be  held  in  accordance  with  ORS  chapter  259, 
If  the  proposition  is  approved  by  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  at  such  election, 
the  number  of  commissioners  named  in  the  petitions  requesting  the  election,  who 
received  the  highest  vote  at  the  election,  shall  take  office  as  of  the  next  regular 
meeting  of  commissioners  following  the  election,  after  first  taking  and  subscrib- 
ing the  oath  of  office. 

(2)  If  only  one  additional  commissioner  is  so  elected  his  first  term  shall  be  four 
years  if  immediately  before  the  election  there  was  an  even  number  of  commis- 
sioners or  two  years  if  immediately  before  the  election  there  was  an  odd  number 
of  commissioners.  If  more  than  one  additional  commissioner  is  so  elected,  the 
newly  elected  commissioners  shall  at  such  meeting  determine  by  lot  the  length  of 
term  each  shall  hold  office  in  a  manner  so  as  to  comply  with  subsection  (2)  of 
ORS  558.400. 

[1969  c.698  s.32  :  1973  c.796  s.73  : 1975  c.647  s.49] 
558.420[1969  c.698  s.34  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.23  s.12] 

558430  Deposit  and  withdrawal  of  moneys;  annual  reports;  records.  (1)  All 
moneys  of  the  district  shall  be  deposited  in  one  or  more  banks,  to  be  designated 
by  the  commissioners ;  and  shall  be  withdrawn  or  paid  out  only  when  previously 
ordered  by  vote  of  the  commissioners,  and  upon  checks  signed  by  the  treasurer 
and  countersigned  by  the  chairman,  or  in  his  absence  or  inability  to  act,  by  the 
secretary.  A  receipt  or  voucher,  showing  clearly  the  nature  and  items  covered  by 
each  check  drawn,  shall  be  kept  on  file. 

(2)  Annual  reports  shall  be  made  and  filed  by  the  chairman,  secretary  and 
treasurer,  and  at  least  once  in  each  year  a  full  and  complete  itemized  statement 
of  receipts  and  expenditures  shall  be  published  in  a  newspaper  of  general  circu- 
lation, published  in  the  county  in  which  the  district  is  situate. 

(3)  All  the  proceedings  of  the  commissioners  shall  be  entered  at  large  in  a 
record  book.  All  books,  maps,  plans,  documents,  correspondence,  vouchers,  re- 
ports and  other  papers  and  records  pertaining  to  the  business  of  the  district  shall 
be  carefully  preserved  and  shall  be  open  to  inspection  as  public  records  in  the 
office  of  the  county  clerk  of  the  county  in  which  the  greater  part  of  the  district 
is  located.  [1969  c.698  s.36] 

558440  Calling  special  elections.  The  commissioners  at  any  regular  meeting 
of  the  board  of  commissioners  may  call  a  special  election  of  the  electors  of  the 
district.  Such  an  election  must  be  held  at  the  same  time  as  the  next  succeeding 
state-wide  primary  or  general  election.  [1969  c.698  s.30 ;  1971  c.647  s.128] 

558.445 [1969  c.698  s.2  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.647  s.149] 

558.500  [1969  c.698  s.37  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.510  [1969  c.698  s.  38  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.520  [1969  c.698  s.39  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.550[1969  c.698  s.48 :  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.2031 

558.555  [1969  c.698  s.49  ;  repealed  bv  1971  c.727  s.203 1 

558.560[1969  c.698  s.50  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.565 [1969  c.698  s.51 :  repealed  by  1971  c727  s.203] 

558. 570 [1969  c.698  s.52  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.575[1969  c.698  S.53 ;  repealed  bv  1971  c.647  s.149] 

558.580 [1969  c.698  s.54 ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.585[1969  c.698  S.55 ;  repealed  bv  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.600[1969  c.698  s.41  ;  repealed  bv  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.610[1969  c.698  s.42 :  repealed  bv  11)71  c.727  s.203] 

558.620[1969  c.  698  s.43  ;  repealed  bv  1971  c.727  s.203] 

558.630[1969  C.698  s.44  :  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.2031 

558.6501 1969  c.698  s.45  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.203] 

55S.(>00[  19(19  c.698  s.46  :  repealed  by  1971  c.727  s.191] 

558.670[1969  c.698  s.47  ;  repealed  by  1971  c.27  s.203] 

Penalties 

558.990    Penalties.  Any  person  who  violates  any  provision  of  ORS  558.010  to 
558.140  and  558.990  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor. 
[1953  c.654  s.14] 


599 


General  Provisions 

450.010  Establishing  master  plans  and  service  districts.  (1)  Master  plans 
and  service  districts  may  be  established  as  provided  by  this  chapter  regarding: 

(a)  Sewage  works,  including  all  facilities  necessary  for  collecting,  pump- 
ing, treating  and  disposing  of  sanitary  or  storm  sewage. 

(b)  Drainage  works,  including  all  facilities  necessary  for  collecting,, 
pumping  and  disposing  of  storm  and  surface  water. 

(c)  Street  lighting  works,  including  all  facilities  necessary  for  the  light- 
ing of  streets  and  highways. 

(d)  Public  parks  and  recreation  facilities,  including  land,  structures,  equip- 
ment, supplies,  and  personnel  necessary  to  acquire,  develop,  and  maintain 
such  public  park  and  recreation  facilities  and  to  administer  a  program  in 
supervised  recreation  services. 

(e)  Diking  and  flood  control  works,  including  all  facilities  necessary  for 
diking  and  control  of  water  courses. 

(f )  Water  supply  works,  including  all  facilities  necessary  for  tapping  nat- 
ural sources  of  domestic  and  industrial  water,  treating  and  protecting  the 
quality  of  the  water  and  transmitting  it  to  the  point  of  sale  to  any  city, 
domestic  water  supply  corporation  or  other  public  or  private  agency  for  ulti- 
mate distribution  by  the  city,  corporation  or  agency  to  water  users. 

(g)  Solid  waste  disposal.  This  paragraph  does  not  apply  in  Clackamas, 
Multnomah  and  Washington  Counties. 

(h)  Public  transportation,  including  public  depots,  public  parking  and 
the  motor  vehicles  and  other  equipment  necessary  for  the  transportation 
of  persons  together  with  their  personal  property. 

(i)  Agricultural  educational  extension  services. 

(2)  Within  the  geographical  jurisdiction  of  any  local  government  boundary 
commission  established  by  or  pursuant  to  ORS  199.410  to  199.512,  master  plans 
and  service  districts  may  be  established  as  provided  by  this  chapter  regarding; 
(a)  Fire  prevention  and  protection- 
CD)  Enhanced  law  enforcement  services  provided  by  contract  with  the 
sheriff  of  the  county. 

(c)  Domestic,  municipal  and  industrial  water  supply  service. 

(d)  Hospital  and  ambulance  services. 

(e)  Library  services. 

(f )  Vector  control. 

(g)  Cemetery  maintenance. 

(h)  Roads. 

(i)  Weather  modification.  [1963  c.515  s.2 ;  1965  c.246  s.l :  1967  c.538  s.l ; 
1971  c.674  s.l ;  1971  c.687  s.l ;  1973  c.211  s.l ;  1973  c.785  s.l ;  1975  c.630  s.l] 

451420  District  may  construct  and  operate  service  facilities.  When  author- 
ized as  provided  in  ORS  451.410  to  451.600  a  district  may  construct,  maintain  and 
operate  any  or  all  of  the  service  facilities  specified  in  ORS  451.010.  [1955  c.685 
s.2  ;  1963  c.515  s.8  ;  1973  c.785  s.6] 

Pennsylvania 
Pa.  Stat.  Ann.  Tit.  3,  Sec.  1101-1118 

Chapter  16 — Weather  Modification  [New] 

Sec. 

1101.  Declaration  of  policy. 

1102.  Definitions. 

1103.  Weather  Modification  Board. 

1104.  Administration  by  department. 

1105.  When  license  registration  required. 

1106.  Application  for  license. 

1107.  Reeistration  of  equipment. 

1108.  Publication. 

1109.  Emergencies  ;  publication. 

1110.  Records. 

1111.  Research  projects  ;  safety. 

1112.  Enforcement. 

1113.  License  suspensions,  revocations. 

1114.  Damage  compensation. 

1115.  Acts  not  authorized. 

1116.  Penalties. 

1117.  Repeal. 

1118.  Effective  date. 


GOO 


§  1101.  Declaration  of  policy 

The  public  interest,  health,  safety,  welfare  and  necessity  require  that  scientific 
experimentation  in  the  field  of  artificial  nucleation,  and  that  scientific  efforts  to 
develop  and  increase  natural  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in 
any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere,  within  the  State,  be  encouraged  in  order  to 
develop,  conserve,  and  protect  the  natural  water  resources  of  the  State  and  to 
safeguard  life  and  property.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  1. 

%1102.  Definitions 
As  used  in  this  act — 

(1)  "Board"  means  the  Weather  Modification  Board. 

(2)  "Department"  means  the  Department  of  Agriculture. 

(3)  "Operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  pursuant  to  a  single  contract  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing, 
or  attempting  to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area 
over  one  continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  year,  or,  if  the  performance 
of  weather  modification  and  control  activities  is  to  be  undertaken  individually  or 
jointly  by  a  person  or  persons  to  be  benefited  and  not  undertaken  pursuant  to  a 
contract,  "operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to  produce,  a 
certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one  continuing  time 
interval  not  exceeding  one  year. 

(-1)  "Person"  means  any  individual,  firm,  association,  organization,  partner- 
ship, company,  corporation,  private  or  public,  political  subdivision,  or  other 
public  agency. 

(5)  "Research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration  and 
experimentation  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and 
demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing 
of  models  devices,  equipment,  materials  and  processes. 

(6)  "Weather  modification  and  control"  meaus  changing  or  controlling,  or  at- 
tempting to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods  the  natural  development  of 
any  or  all  atmospheric  cloud  forms  and  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in  the 
troposphere.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  2. 

Library  references  :  Agriculture  C^>1.  C.J.S.  Agriculture  §  1  et  seq. 
§  1103.  Weather  Modification  Board1 

(a)  There  is  hereby  created  within  the  department  a  Weather  Modification 
Board.  Such  advisory  board  shall  be  composed  of  seven  members  who  shall  be : 

(1)  The  Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

(2)  The  Secretary  of  Commerce. 

(3)  The  Secretary  of  Health. 

(4)  The  Dean  of  the  College  of  Earth  Sciences  at  the  Pennsylvania  State 
University. 

(5)  Three  members  to  be  appointed  by  the  Governor  with  the  advice  and 
consent  of  the  Senate. 

(b)  Terms  of  all  appointed  members  shall  be  for  four  years.  Appointed  members 
shall  receive  the  sum  of  thirty  dollars  ($30)  per  day  for  each  day  or  part  thereof 
devoted  to  the  committee's  activities.  1968,  Jan.  18,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  1  et  seq. 

§  110'/.  Administration  by  department 

The  department  shall  administer  this  act  and  in  so  doing  shall  ask  for  and  con- 
sider the  recommendations  of  the  board  herein  created  which  shall  advise  on  all 
the  matters  regulated  by  this  act.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §4. 

Library  references  :  Agriculture  C=>1.  C.J.S.  Agriculture  §  1  et  seq. 

§  1105.  When  license  registration  required 

(a)  No  person,  without  first  securing  a  license  from  the  department,  shall  cause 
or  attempt  to  cause  condensation  or  precipitation  oc  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water 
in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere. 

(bj  No  person  without  registering  with  the  board  shall  have  in  his  possession 
any  cloud  seeding  equipment  unless  he  is  an  employe  of  or  under  contract  with  a 
person  conducting  a  weather  modification  and  control  operation  who  has  been 
granted  a  license  by  the  board.  1908,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  ;"». 

Library  references:  Licenses  C=>11(1).  C.J.S.  Licenses  §26  et  seq.  P.L.E. 
Licenses  §  8. 


»  Enrolled  bill  roads  "Advisory  Committee  on  Cloud  Seeding". 


601 


§  HOG.  Application  for  license 

(a)  Any  person  desiring  to  do  any  of  the  acts  specified  in  section  51  may  file 
witli  the  board  an  application  in  writing  for  a  license.  Each  application  shall  be 
accompanied  by  a  filing  fee  fixed  by  the  board  but  not  to  exceed  one  hundred 
dollars  ($100),  and  shall  be  on  a  form  to  be  supplied  for  such  purpose  by  the 
board. 

(b)  Every  application  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following  : 

(1)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  applicant. 

(2)  The  previous  education,  experience,  and  qualifications  of  the  applicant, 
or,  if  the  applicant  is  other  than  an  individual,  the  previous  education, 
experience,  and  qualifications  of  the  persons  who  will  be  in  control  of  and 
charged  with  the  operations  of  the  applicant.  Previous  experience  includes 
sub-contracting  or  counseling  services. 

(3)  A  general  description  of  the  operations  which  the  applicant  intends  to 
conduct  and  the  method  and  type  of  equipment  including  all  nucleating 
agents,  that  the  applicant  proposes  to  use.  Aircraft  must  be  listed  by  numbers 
and  pilots'  names. 

(4)  A  statement  listing  all  employes,  who  are  residents  of  Pennsylvania, 
and/or  who  will  be  directly  employed  in  the  intended  operation. 

(5)  A  bond  or  insurance  covering  any  damage  the  licensee  may  cause 
through  his  operations  in  an  amount  of  fifty  thousand  dollars  ($50,000)  or 
other  evidence  of  financial  responsibility  shall  be  furnished  and  executed 

•  at  the  time  of  the  grant  of  the  license. 

(6)  Every  applicant  shall  have  a  resident  agent  within  the  Commonwealth. 

(c)  Upon  the  filing  of  the  application  upon  a  form  supplied  by  the  board  and 
containing  the  information  prescribed  by  this  act  and  accompanied  by  the  required 
filing  fee  and  bond  or  insurance,  the  board  may  issue  a  license  to  the  applicant 
entitling  the  applicant  to  conduct  the  operations  described  in  the  application  for 
the  calendar  year  for  which  the  license  is  issued,  unless  the  license  is  sooner 
revoked  or  suspended  or  modified. 

(d)  A  license  may  be  renewed  annually  upon  application  to  the  board, 
accompanied  by  a  renewal  fee  fixed  by  the  board  but  not  to  exceed  one  hundred 
dollars  ($100) ,  on  or  before  the  last  day  of  January  of  the  calendar  year  for  which 
the  license  is  renewed.  196S,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  6. 

Library  references :  Licenses  Q^>22.  C.J.S.  Licenses  §§  34,  38,  39.  P.L.E.  Licenses 
§16. 

§  1107.  Registration  of  equipment 

Every  person  not  desiring  a  license  who  owns  or  possesses  cloud  seeding  equip- 
ment shall  promptly  register  the  same  with  the  board  on  a  form  furnished  by  it. 
1968.  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  7. 

Library  references :  Licenses  <&z>24.  C.J.S.  Licenses  §  41.  P.L.E.  Licenses  §  16. 

§  1108.  PuUication 

(a)  Prior  to  undertaking  any  operation  authorized  by  the  license,  the  licensee 
shall  file  with  the  department  and  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of  intention.  The 
licensee  shall  then  confine  his  activities  for  that  operation  substantially  within  the 
time  and  area  limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention. 

(b)  The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following : 

(1)  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee. 

(2)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or 
persons  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted. 

(3)  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  opera- 
tion will  be  conducted. 

(4)  The  area  which  will  be  affected  by  the  operation  as  near  as  the  same 
may  be  determined  in  advance. 

(c)  The  licensee  shall  cause  the  notice  of  intention  to  be  published  once  a  week 
for  three  successive  weeks  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  pub- 
lished within  any  county  wherein  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  which 
the  affected  area  is  located,  or,  if  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in  more  than 
one -com:  tv  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one  county  or  is  located 
in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  Which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted,  then  such 
notice  shall  be  published  in  like  manner  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  cir- 
culation and  published  within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case  there  is  no  newspaper 
published  within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall  be  made  in  a  newspaper 
having  a  general  circulation  within  the  county. 


1  Section  1105  of  this  title. 


602 


(d)  Proof  of  publication  shall  be  filed  by  the  licensee  with  the  department 
within  fifteen  days  from  the  date  of  the  last  publication  of  the  notice.  Proof  of 
publication  shall  be  by  copy  of  the  notice  as  published  atached  to  and  made  a  part 
of  the  affidavit  of  the  publisher  or  foreman  of  the  newspaper  publishing  the 
notice.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  8. 

Library  references  :  Licenses  0=^22.  C.J.S.  Licenses  §§  34,  38,  39.  P.L.E.  Licenses 
§  16. 

§1109.    Emergencies;  publication 

(a)  Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  this  act  to  the  contrary,  the  board  may 
grant  a  licensee  permission  to  undertake  an  emergency  nucleation  project,  with- 
out prior  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  section  8(a),1  if  the 
same  appears  to  the  department  to  be  necessary  or  desirable  in  aid  of  extinguish- 
ment of  tires. 

(b)  Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  this  act  to  the  contrary,  upon  request  of 
the  county  commissioners,  of  a  county  or  of  the  governing  body  of  a  city,  borough, 
town  or  tow  nships,  and  upon  the  submission  of  such  supporting  evidence  as  the 
board  may  require,  the  board  may  grant  a  licensee  permission  to  undertake  a 
nucleation  project  for  the  purpose  of  alleviating  a  drought  emergency,  without 
prior  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  section  8(a)  requiring 
publication  of  notice  of  intention,  if  such  project  appears  to  the  department  to 
Jbe  necessary  or  desirable. 

(o  Nothing  contained  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  as  to  relieve  the  li- 
censee in  the  cases  set  forth  in  subsection  (a)  or  (b)  of  this  section  from  com- 
pliance with  the  provisions  of  section  8  requiring  publication  of  notice  of  inten- 
tion and  riling  of  proof  of  such  publication,  as  soon  after  the  granting  of  permis- 
sion by  the  board  as  is  practicable.  In  lieu  thereof  the  licensee  may  furnish  equiv- 
alent transmission  of  notice  of  intention  by  radio  or  television,  and  prof  thereof, 
as  soon  after  the  granting  of  permission  by  the  board  as  is  practicable.  1968,  Jan. 
19.  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §9. 

Library  references  :  Licenses  <3=^22.  C.J.S.  Licenses  §§  34,  38,  39.  P.L.E.  Licenses 
|16. 

$1110.  Accords 

(a)  Every  licensee  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  con- 
ducted by  him  pursuant  to  his  license  showing  the  method  employed,  the  type  of 
equipment  used,  the  times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equipment,  the  names  and 
post  office  address  of  each  person  participating  or  assisting  in  the  operation  other 
than  the  licensee,  and  such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  board, 
and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  board  immediately  upon  the  completion  of  each 
operation. 

(b)  Each  licensee  shall  further  prepare  and  maintain  an  evaluation  statement 
for  each  operation  which  shall  include  a  report  as  to  estimated  precipitation,  defin- 
ing the  gain  or  loss  occurring  from  nucleation  activities,  together  with  supporting 
data  therefor.  This  statement,  together  with  such  other  pertinent  information  as 
tbe  board  may  require,  shall  be  sent  to  the  board  upon  completion  and  be  avail- 
able to  inspection  by  the  board  at  all  times  on  the  licensee's  premises. 

(ci  The  board  shall  require  written  reports  concerning  each  operation  con- 
ducted by  a  licensee  under  this  act. 

i  d  )  All  information  on  an  operation  shall  be  submitted  to  the  board  before  any 
information  on  such  operation  may  be  released  to  the  public. 

(e)  The  reports  and  records  in  the  custody  of  the  board  shall  be  open  for  public 
examination  as  public  documents.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §10. 

Library  references:  Licenses  C^>  36.  C.J.S.  Licenses  §42.  P.L.E.  Licenses  §36. 

§  ////.    Research  projects:  safety 

(ii)  Research  work  within  the  province  of  this  statute  shall  be  permitted  only 
when  authorized  by  the  board. 

(In  Government  and  armed  forces  projects  within  the  province  of  this  statute 
must  meet  all  the  requirements  of  this  act. 

(c)  No  nucleating  agent  may  be  used  in  concentrations  dangerous  to  man  or 
causes  environmental  pollution  as  determined  bv  the  State  Department  of  Health. 
L968,  Jan.  1!>.  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §11. 

Library  references:  Agriculture  Ol.  C.J.S.  Agriculture  §  1  et  seq. 

§  It  12.  Enforcement 

In  order  to  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  act,  the  Pennsylvania  State  Police 


i  Section  1108  of  tliis  title. 


603 


shall,  on  request  of  the  board,  assign  at  least  one  trooper  and  one  investigator 
to  an  area  where  unlawful  cloud  seeding  is  suspected.  If  such  police  request  the 
same,  the  Pennsylvania  Aeronautics  Commission  shall  assign  an  airplane  and 
pilot.  Air  samples  shall  be  taken  by  the  Pennsylvania  Air  Pollution  Commission  if 
requested  by  the  State  Police  or  the  board.  For  such  enforcement  purposes,  the 
State  Department  of  Health  shall  furnish  such  technical  services  as  the  board 
may  request.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  12. 

§  111S.    License  suspensions,  revocations 

Any  license  may  be  revoked,  suspended  or  modified  if  the  board  finds,  after  due 
notice  to  the  licensee  and  a  hearing  thereon,  that  the  licensee  has  failed  or  re- 
fused to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act.  The  proceedings  herein 
referred  to  shall  be  conducted  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  act  of 
June  4,  1945  (P.L.  1388).  known  as  the  "Administrative  Agency  Law,"1  and  the 
board  shall  have  all  the  powers  granted  therein.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024, 
§13. 

Library  references:  Licenses  3S.  C.J.S.  Licenses  §§43,  44.  P.L.E.  Licenses 
§26. 

§  1114.    Damage  compensation 

Any  licensee  who  causes  a  drought  as  determined  by  the  board  shall  compen- 
sate farmers  for  damages.  Any  licensee  who  by  causing  heavy  downpours  or 
storms  which  cause  damage  to  lands  as  determined  by  the  board  shall  com- 
pensate farmers  and  property  owners  for  such  damages.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967) 
1024,  §  14. 

Library  references :  Agriculture  C=>  1.  C.J.S.  Agriculture  §  1  et  seq. 
§  1115.    Acts  not  authorized 

(a)  Nothing  contained  in  this  act  shall  authorize  any  person  to  carry  out  a 
cloud  seeding  operation  from  Pennsylvania  to  seed  in  another  state  where  such 
cloud  seeding  is  prohibited. 

(b)  Nothing  contained  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  authorize  the  suppres- 
sion of  lightning.  1968.  Jan.  19.  P.L.  (1967  | .  1024,  §  15. 

Library  references  :  Agriculture  C=>  1.  C.J.S.  Agriculture  §  1  et  seq. 

§  1116.  Penalties 

.(a)  Any  airplane  pilot  who  flies  an  airplane  with  numbers  invisible  to  escape 
identification  under  this  act  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  upon  convic- 
tion thereof,  have  his  license  revoked  for  a  period  of  five  years. 

(b)  Any  airport  owner  or  operator  who  boards  cloud  seeding  planes  to  seed 
clouds  or  who  operates  as  a  cloud  seeder  without  a  license  shall  be  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor,  and  upon  conviction  thereof  have  his  airport  permit  revoked  for 
one  year  and  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of  ten  thousand  dollars  ($10,000)  and 
for  a  second  or  subsequent  offense,  he  shall  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of  fiftv 
thousand  dollars  ($50,000). 

(c)  Any  person  knowingly  having  in  his  possession  without  registering  the 
same  with  the  department  any  cloud  seeding  equipment  shall,  on  conviction 
thereof,  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of  ten  thousand  dollars  ($10.000) . 

(d)  Any  person  who  makes  any  false  statement  to  secure  a  license  under 
this  act  shall.  011  conviction  thereof,  have  his  license  revoked  permanently. 

ie>  Any  person  who  violates  any  other  provision  of  this  act  is  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor  and  shall,  upon  conviction  thereof,  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  not 
exceeding  one  thousand  dollars  ($1,000)  or  undergo  imprisonment  for  not 
exceeding  one  year,  or  both.  1968.  Jan.  19.  P.L.  (1967)  1024.  §  16. 

Library  references:  Aviation  123.  C.J.S.  Aerial  Navigation  §§  11,  16.  P.L.E. 
Aeronautics  §  1. 

§  1117.  Repeal 

The  act  of  November  9.  1965  (P.L.  677),  entitled  "An  act  prohibiting  certain 
weather  modification  activities  whenever  the  county  commissioners  shall  adopt 
a  resolution  stating  that  such  action  is  detrimental  to  the  welfare  of  the  county, 
and  providing  penalties."  is  repealed."  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §17. 

Library  references:  Agriculture  <D=>  1.  C.J.S.  Agriculture  §  1  et  seq. 

§  1118.    Effective  date 

This  act  shall  take  effect  immediately.  1968,  Jan.  19,  P.L.  (1967)  1024,  §  18. 


1  71  P.S.  §  1710.1  et  seq. 
3  18  P.S.  §§  3S71  to  3874. 


604 


South  Dakota 

S.D.  Compiled  Laws  Ann.  Sees.  38-9-1-38-9-22;  1-40-8;  10-12-18 

1-^0-8.  Administrative  functions  performed  for  weather  modification  com- 
mission.— Except  as  provided  by  §38-9-4.1,  the  department  of  natural  resource 
development  shall,  under  the  direction  and  control  of  the  secretary  of  natural 
resource  development,  perform  all  administrative  functions  except  special 
budgetary  functions  (as  defined  in  §1-32-1)  of  the  weather  modification 
commission. 

Chapter  3S-9 — Weather  Modification  Activities 

Sec. 

3&-9-I.        Definition  of  terms. 

38-9-3.        Policy  and  purpose  of  regulation. 

38-9-4.        Weather  modification  commission  established — Composition. 

3S-9-4.1.      Direction  and  supervision  by  department  of  natural  resource  development — 

Independent  functions  retained  by  commission. 
38-9-5.        Areas  from  which  members  of  commission  appointed. 
38-9-6.  Repealed. 

3S-9-9.        Operations  and  research  activities. 
38-9-10.1.    Utilization  of  technical  resources  of  schools. 
38-9-11.1.    Co-operation  with  counties — County  participation. 

38-9-12.       License  and  permit  required  to  engage  in  Aveather  modification — Violation  of 
terms  unlawful. 

38-9-12.1.    Exemption  of  experimental  and  emergency  activities. 
38-9-13.  Repealed. 

38-9-14.       Issuance  of  license  to  competent  applicant — Competence  of  organization — 
Application  fee. 

3S-9-15.       Fee  required  on  issuance  or  renewal  of  license — Disposition. 
38-9-10,  38-9-17.  Repealed. 
38-9—18.       Expiration  of  licenses. 
38-9-1S.1.    Issuance  of  renewal  license. 

38-9-1S.2.    Permits  issued  to  licensees — Fee — Publication  of  notice  of  intention — Finan- 
cial responsibility. 
3S-9-18.3.    Means  of  proving  financial  responsibility. 
38-9-18.4.    Permit  fee — Disposition. 

38-9-18.5.    Permit  required  for  each  operation — Maximum  duration  of  permit. 
38-9-19.       Suspension,  revocation,  refusal  or  refusal  to  renew  license  or  permit. 
38—9—19.1.    Modification  of  permit- — Notice  and  hearing. 

38-9-21.       Unlicensed  weather  modification  activity  as  misdemeanor — Penalty. 
3S-9-22.       Administration  by  department — Powers  retained  by  commission. 
38-9-23.  Repealed. 

3S-9-1.  Definition  of  terms. — As  used  in  this  chapter  : 

(1)  The  term  "weather  modification"  means  performing  any  activity  with  the 
int  . 'nt ion  of  producing  artifical  changes  in  the  composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics 
of  the  atmosphere. 

(2)  and  (3)  *  *  *  [Same  as  parent  volume.] 

(4)  The  term  "operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification 
activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to  produce,  a 
certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one  continuing  time 
interval  not  exceeding  one  yea»\ 

38-9-3.  Policy  and  purpose  of  regulations. — It  is  hereby  declared  that  weather 
modification  techniques  for  precipitation  management  should  be  used  to  aug- 
ment precipitation  and  decrease  hailfall  damage  in  South  Dakota.  The  applica- 
tion of  weather  modification  techniques  shall  be  carried  out  under  proper  safe- 
guards to  supply  sufficient  data  and  accurate  information  in  order  to  provide 
a  net  economic  benefit  and  enhance  knowledge  concerning  weather  modification 
and  to  protect  life,  property  and  the  public  interest. 

38-9-J/.  Weather  modification  commission  established — Composition. — There 
is  hereby  established  a  weather  modification  commission,  hereinafter  called  the 
commission  composed  of  seven  representatives,  one  from  each  area  designated  by 
§  38-9-5,  to  be  appointed  biennially  by  the  Governor  on  July  first  and  provided 
further,  no  more  than  four  shall  be  from  any  one  political  party. 

38-9'/. J.  Direction  and  supervision  by  department  of  natural  resource  de- 
velopment— Independent  functions  retained  by  commission. — The  weather  modi- 
fication commission  shall  be  administered  under  the  direction  and  supervision 
of  the  department  of  natural  resource  development  and  the  secretary  thereof,  but 
shall  retain  the  quasi-judicial,  quasi-legislative,  advisory,  other  nonadministra- 
tive  and  special  budgetary  functions  (as  defined  in  §1-32-1)  otherwise  vested 
in  it  and  shall  exercise  tbosp  functions  independently  of  the  secretary  of  natural 
resource  development.  The  commission  shall  also  retain  the  function  pf  setting 
the  te  rms  of  and  approving  the  contracts  with  otber  units  of  government  for  the 
sharing  of  the  costs  of  weather  modification  operations. 


605 


88-9-5.  Areas  from,  which  members  of  commission  appointed. — Representa- 
tives of  the  commission  shall  be  appointed  from  areas  containing  the  following 
counties : 

Area  I — Bennett,  Custer,  Fall  River,  Haakon,  Jackson,  Pennington,  Shannon 
and  Washabaugh;  Area  II — Butte,  Harding,  Lawrence,  Meade  and  Perkins; 
.Area  III — Campbell,  Corson,  Dewey,  Hughes,  Potter,  Stanley,  Sully,  Walworth 
and  Ziebach ;  Area  IV — Aurora,  Brule,  Buffalo,  Charles  Mix,  Davison,  Douglas, 
Gregory,  Jerauld,  Jones,  Lyman,  Mellette,  Sanborn,  Todd  and  Tripp;  Area  V^- 
Bon  Homme,  Clay,  Hanson,  Hutchinson,  Lake,  Lincoln,  MeCook,  Miner,  Minne- 
haha, Moody,  Turner,  Union  and  Yankton ;  Area  VI — Beadle,  Brown,  Edmunds, 
Faulk,  Hand,  Hyde,  McPherson  and  Spink ;  Area  VII — Brookings,  Clark,  Cod- 
ington, Day.  Deuel,  Grant,  Hamlin,  Kingsbury,  Marshall  and  Roberts. 

38-9-9.  Operations  and  research  activities. — The  commission  shall  carry  on 
operations  and  research  on  a  state-wide  basis,  by  its  own  staff,  or  by  contract 
with  approved  cloud  seeding  organizations  or  in  co-operation  with  other  agencies 
as  provided  by  law. 

38-9-10.1.  Utilization  of  technical  resources  of  schools. — Pa  carrying  out  the 
purposes  of  this  chapter,  the  commission  shall  utilize  to  the  extent  possible  the 
facilities  and  technical  resources  of  the  public  and  private  educational  institu- 
tions of  the  state. 

38-9-11.1.  Co-operation  with  counties — County  participation. — The  commis- 
sion may,  at  its  discretion,  co-operate  wuth  county  programs  of  weather  modifi- 
cation in  carrying  out  the  purposes  of  this  chapter,  and  in  addition  to  the  powers 
of  counties  specified  in  §  10-18,  counties  may  contribute  to  and  participate  in 
any  weather  modification  program  carried  out  by  the  state. 

38-9-12.  License  and  permit  required  to  engage  in  weather  modification — 
Violation  of  terms  unlawful. — It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person  to  engage  in 
activities  for  weather  modification  without  a  weather  modification  license  and 
a  weather  modification  permit  issued  by  the  commission  or  in  violation  of  any 
term  or  condition  of  the  license  or  the  permit  except  as  the  commission  shall 
provide  by  regulation  under  §  38-9-12.1. 

38-9-12.1  Exemption  of  experimental  and  emergency  activities. — The  com- 
mission, to  the  extent  it  considers  exemptions  practical,  shall  provide  for  ex- 
empting laboratory  research  and  experiments  and  activities  of  an  emergency 
nature  against  fire,  frost,  sleet  or  fog  from  the  license  and  permit  requirements 
of  this  chapter. 

Source:  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  10.  See  Tex  Vernon's  Civ  Code,  Art  8280-12,  §  8  (2), 
(3). 

38-9-13.    Repealed  by  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  21. 

38-9-14-  Issuance  of  license  to  competent  applicant — Competence  of  organi- 
zation— Application  fee. — The  commission,  in  accordance  with  its  regulations, 
shall  issue  a  weather  modification  license  to  each  applicant  who  pays  the  license 
fee  and  who  demonstrates,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  commission,  competence 
in  the  field  of  meteorology  which  is  reasonably  necessary  to  engage  in  wTeather 
modification  activities.  If  the  applicant  is  an  organization,  the  competence  must 
be  demonstrated  by  the  individual  or  individuals  who  are  to  be  in  control  and 
in  charge  of  the  operation  for  the  applicant.  Each  application  shall  be  accom- 
panied by  a  fee  of  twenty-five  dollars. 

38-9-15.  Fee  required  on  issuance  or  renewal  of  license — Disposition. — Any 
person  issued  an  original  license  or  a  renewal  license  under  this  chapter  shall  pay 
a  fee  of  one  hundred  dollars.  The  money  collected  from  such  fees  shall  be  depos- 
ited with  the  state  treasurer  in  the  state  general  fund. 

38-9-16,  38-9-17.    Repealed  by  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  21. 

38-9-18.  Expiration  of  licenses. — Each  original  license  or  renewal  license 
issued  under  this  chapter  shall  expire  on  December  thirty-first  of  the  year  for 
which  it  was  issued. 

38-9-18.1.  Issuance  of  renewal  license. — At  the  expiration  of  the  license 
period,  the  commission  shall  issue  a  renewal  license  to  each  applicant  who  pays 
the  license  fee  and  who  has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  issuance  of  an 
original  license. 

Source  :  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  14. 

38-9-18.2.  Permits  issued  to  licensees — Fee — Publication  of  notice  of  inten- 
tion— Financial  responsibility. — The  commission,  in  accordance  with  its  regula- 
tions, shall  issue  a  weather  modification  permit  to  each  applicant  who  holds  a 
valid  weather  modification  license,  pays  the  permit  fee,  publishes  such  notice 
of  intention  as  the  commission  shall  require  by  regulation  and  submits  proof 
of  publication,  and  furnishes  proof  of  financial  responsibility. 

Source  :  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  15. 

34-857—79  41 


606 


38-9-18.3.  Means  of  proving  financial  responsibility. — Proof  of  financial  re- 
sponsibility is  made  by  showing,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  commission,  that  the 
licensee  has  the  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for  liability  which  might  reason- 
ably result  from  the  operation  for  which  the  permit  is  sought. 

Source :  SL  1973.  ch  254,  §  IS.  See  Tex  Vernon's  Civ  Code,  Art  8280-12,  §  14. 

38-9-184.  Permit  fee — Disposition—Any  person  issued  a  permit  under  this 
chapter  shall  pay  a  fee  of  one  hundred  dollars.  The  money  collected  from  such 
fees  shall  be  deposited  with  the  state  treasurer  in  the  state  general  fund. 

Source  :  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  16. 

38-9-18.5.  Permit  required  for  each  operation — Maximum  duration  of  per- 
mit.— A  separate  permit  is  required  for  each  operation.  The  commission  shall 
not  issue  a  permit  for  operations  in  an  area  for  a  period  to  exceed  one  year. 

Source  :  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  17. 

SS-9-19.  Suspension,  revocation,  refusal  or  refusal  to  renew  license  or  per- 
mit.— The  commission  may  suspend  or  revoke  a  license  or  permit  if  it  appears  that 
the  licensee  no  longer  has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  an 
original  license  or  permit  or  has  violated  any  provision  of  this  chapter.  The 
commission  may  refuse  to  renew  the  license  of,  or  to  issue  another  permit  to, 
any  applicant  who  has  failed  to  comply  with  any  provision  of  this  chapter. 

38-9-19.1.  Modification  of  permit — Xotiee  and  hearing. — The  commission  may 
modify  the  terms  and  conditions  of  a  permit  if  the  licensee  is  first  given  notice 
and  reasonable  opportunity  for  a  hearing  on  the  need  for  a  modification  and  it 
appears  to  the  commission  that  a  modification  is  necessary  to  protect  the  health 
or  property  of  any  person. 

Source :  SL  1973,  ch  254,  §  19.  See  Tex  Vernon's  Civ  Code,  Art  8280-12.  §  17(2). 

38-9-21.  Unlicensed  weather  modification  activity  as  misdemeanor — 
Penalty. — Any  person  or  persons  engaging  in  any  type  of  weather  modification 
activities  without  a  valid  license  and  permit  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor, 
and  subject  to  a  fine  not  to  exceed  one  thousand  dollars  or  by  imprisonment  in 
the  county  jail  for  a  period  not  to  exceed  thirty  days,  for  each  such  offense. 

38-9-22.  Administration  by  department — Powers  retained  by  commission. — 
The  department  of  natural  resource  development  shall  administer  and  enforce 
the  provisions  of  this  chapter,  provided,  however,  that  the  commission  shall 
retain  the  authority  and  policy  powers  reserved  to  it  by  §  38-9—1.1. 

10-12-18.  County  weather-modification  levy  authorized — Maximum  rate — 
Contractors  to  be  licensed. — The  board  of  county  commissioners  of  each  county 
may  levy  and  collect  annually  a  tax  of  not  to  exceed  one  mill  upon  assessed 
valuation  of  the  property  in  said  county,  for  a  "weather-modification''  fund, 
which  levy  shall  lie  exclusive  of  the  maximum  levy  provided  by  law.  The  board 
of  county  commissioners  of  counties  which  have  sixteen  million  dollars  or  less 
in  assessed  valuation  of  property  in  that  county  may  levy  and  collect  annually 
a  tax  of  not  to  exceed  two  mills  on  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  property  in 
that  county,  which  levy  shall  be  exclusive  of  the  maximum  levy  provided  by 
law.  Such  fund  shall  be  used  only  for  the  gathering  of  information  upon,  aiding 
in  or  conducting  any  program  for  weather  modification,  as  defined  by  law.  within 
said  county,  or  in  conjunction  with  any  other  county  or  counties.  The  provisions 
of  chapter  7-21,  relating  to  county  budgeting  shall  not  apply  to  appropriations 
made  under  the  provisions  of  this  section.  Provided,  however,  that  for  only  the 
initial  or  first  appropriation  of  said  "weather-modification"'  activities  as  afore- 
mentioned, said  county  commissioners  may,  at  their  discretion,  appropriate  from 
moneys  not  otherwise  appropriated  in  the  general  fund,  such  moneys  as  are 
necessary  for  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  section,  provided  that  said  ap- 
propriation shall  not  exceed  an  amount  equal  to  one  mill  levy  upon  the  assessed 
valuation  of  the  property  in  said  county.  The  board  of  county  commissioners 
shall  enter  into  no  contract  or  agreement  for  any  such  purpose  except  with  one 
who  has  been  duly  licensed  under  the  provisions  of  chapter  38-9.  except  for  the 
purpose  of  gathering  information  they  may  enter  into  a  contract  or  agreement 
with  a  state  agency  not  licensed. 

Texas 

Texas  Water  Code  Tit.  2  Sees.  14.001-14.112;  Texas  Civil  Code  tit.  120A,  Sec. 
6889-7(16) 

Weather  Modification 

Sec.  If).  The  Division  of  Disaster  Emergency  Services  shall  keep  continuously 
apprised  of  weather  conditions  which  present  danger  of  precipitation  or  other 
climatic  activity  severe  enough  to  constitute  a  disaster.  If  the  division  determines 


607 


that  precipitation  that  may  result  from  weather  modification  operations,  either 
by  itself  or  in  conjunction  with  other  precipitation  or  climatic  conditions  or 
activity,  would  create  or  contribute  to  the  severity  of  a  disaster,  it  shall  request 
in  the  name  of  the  governor  that  the  officer  or  agency  empowered  to  issue  per- 
mits for  weather  modification  operations  suspend  the  issuance  of  the  permits. 
On  the  governor's  request,  no  permits  may  be  issued  until  the  division  informs 
the  officer  or  agency  that  the  danger  has  passed. 

Chapter  14.  Weather  Modification 
Subchapter  A.  General  Provisions 

Sec. 

14.001.  Short  Title. 

14.002.  Definitions. 

[Sections  14.003  to  14.010  reserved  for  expansion] 

Subchapter  B.  Powers  and  Duties  of  Board 

14.011.  Regulations — In  General. 

14.012.  Regulations — Licenses  and  Permits. 

14.013.  Regulations — Safety. 

14.014.  Studies  ;  Investigations  ;  Hearings. 

14.015.  Advisory  Committees. 

14.016.  Personnel. 

14.017.  Materials  and  Equipment. 
14.01S.  Interstate  Compacts. 

14.019.  Contracts,  Cooperative  Agreements.  Etc. 

14.020.  Promotion  of  Research  and  Development. 

14.021.  Grants.  Gifts,  Etc. 

14.022.  Disposition  of  License  and  Permit  Fees. 

14.023.  Oaths  of  Witnesses  ;  Subpoenas. 
[Sections  14.024  to  14.040  reserved  for  expansion] 

Subchapter  C.  Licenses  and  Permits 

14.041.  License  and  Permit  Required. 

14.042.  Exemptions. 

14.043.  Issuance  of  License. 

14.044.  License  Fee. 
14.043.  Expiration  Date. 
14.046.  Renewal  License. 

[Sections  14.047  to  14.060  reserved  for  expansion] 

14.061.  Issuance  of  Permit. 

14.062.  Permit  Fee. 

14.063.  Scope  of  Permit. 

14.064.  Application  and  Notice  of  Intention. 

14.065.  Content  of  Notice. 

14.066.  Publication  of  Notice. 

14.067.  Proof  of  Publication  :  Affidavit. 

14.068.  Proof  of  Financial  Responsibility. 

14.069.  Modification  of  Permit. 

14.070.  Scope  of  Activity. 

14.071.  Records  and  Reports. 

[Sections  14.072  to  14.090  reserved  for  expansion] 

Subchapter  D.  Sanctions 

1091.  Suspension  ;  Revocation  ;  Refusal  to  Renew. 

1092.  Hearing  Required. 

1093.  Record  of  Hearing. 

[Sections  14.094  to  14.100  reserved  for  expansion] 

1101.  Immunity  of  State. 

1102.  Private  Legal  Relationships. 

[Sections  14.103  to  14.110  reserved  for  expansion] 

1111.  Penalty 

1112.  Enforcement  by  Board. 

Subchapter  A.  General  Provisions 
Section  U.001.  Short  Title 

This  chapter  may  be  cited  as  the  Weather  Modification  Act. 
|  Uf.002.  Definitions 

As  used  in  this  chapter,  unless  the  context  requires  a  different  definition : 

(1)  "board"  means  the  Texas  Water  Development  Board  ; 

(2)  "weather  modification  and  control"  means  changing  or  controlling, 
or  attempting  to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods,  the  natural  devel- 
opment of  atmospheric  cloud  forms  or  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in 
the  troposphere ; 

(3)  "operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and 
.control  activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting 


608 


to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one 
continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  four  years :  and 

(4)  "research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration, 
experimentation,  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories 
of  a  scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental 
and  demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and 
testing  of  models,  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  processes. 
Amended  by  Acts  1975,  64th  Leg.,  p.  1394,  ch.  538,  §  1,  eff.  Sept.  1,  1975. 
1975  Amendment.  In  subd.  (3),  substituted  "four  years"  for  "one  year". 

Subchapter  B.  Powers  and  Duties  of  Board 

§  H.QH.  Regulations — In  General 

The  board  may  make  regulations  necessary  to  the  exercise  of  its  powers  and  the 
performance  of  its  duties  under  this  chapter. 

§  14-012.  Regulations — Licenses  and  Permits 

In  order  to  effectuate  the  purposes  of  this  chapter,  the  board  may  make  regu- 
lations establishing  procedures  and  conditions  for  the  issuance  of  licenses  and 
permits. 

§  14.013.  Regulations— Safety 

The  board  may,  by  regulation  or  order,  establish  any  standards  and  instruc- 
tions to  govern  the  carrying  out  of  research  or  projects  in  weather  modification 
and  control  that  the  board  considers  necessary  or  desirable  to  minimize  danger 
to  health  or  property. 

§  14-014-  Studies;  Investigations;  Hearings 

The  board  may  make  any  studies  or  investigations,  obtain  any  information, 
and  hold  any  hearings  the  board  considers  necessary  or  proper  to  assist  it  in 
exercising  its  power  or  administering  or  enforcing  this  chapter  or  any  regulations 
or  orders  issued  under  this  chapter. 

§  14-015.  Advisory  Committees 

The  board  may  establish  advisory  committees  to  advise  the  board  and  to  make 
recommendations  to  the  board  concerning  legislation,  policies,  administration, 
research,  and  other  matters. 

§  I4.OI6.  Personnel 

The  board  may,  as  provided  by  the  general  appropriations  act,  point  and  fix 
the  compensation  of  any  personnel,  including  specialists  and  consultants,  neces- 
sary to  perform  its  duties  and  functions  under  this  chapter. 

§  14.017.  Materials  and  Equipment 

The  board  may  acquire,  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  any  materials,  equip- 
ment, and  facilities  necessary  to  perform  its  duties  and  functions  under  this 
chapter. 

§  1^.018.  Interstate  Compacts 

The  board  may  represent  the  state  in  matters  pertaining  to  plan  procedure*, 
or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  relating  to  weather  modification  and 
control. 

§  14-019.  Contracts,  Cooperative  Agreements,  Etc. 

(a)  The  board  may  cooperate  with  public  or  private  agencies  to  promote  the 
purposes  of  this  chapter. 

(b)  The  board  may  enter  into  cooperative  agreements  with  the  United  States 
or  any  of  its  agencies,  or  with  counties  and  cities  of  tbis  state,  or  with  any  pri- 
vate or  public  agencies,  for  conducting  weather  modification  or  cloud-seeding 
operations. 

(c)  The  board  may  represent  the  state,  counties,  cities,  and  public  and  private 
agencies  in  contracting  with  private  concerns  for  the  performance  of  weather 
modification  or  cloud-seeding  operations. 

§  Vh020.  Promotion  of  Research  and  Development 

(a)  In  order  to  assist  in  expanding  the  theoretical  and  practcial  knowledge 
01'  weal  her  modification  and  control,  the  board  shall  provide  continuous  research 
and  development  in : 


609 


(1)  the  theory  and  development  of  methods  of  weather  modification  and 
control,  including  processes,  materials,  and  devices  related  to  these  methods ; 

(2)  the  utilization  of  weather  modification  and  control  for  agricultural, 
industrial,  commercial,  and  other  purposes  ;  and 

(3)  the  protection  of  life  and  property  during  research  and  operational 
activities. 

(b)  The  board  may  conduct  and  may  contract  for  research  and  development 
activities  relating  to  the  purposes  of  this  section. 

§  11021.  Grants,  Gifts,  Etc. 

Subject  to  any  limitations  imposed  by  law,  the  board  may  accept  federal 
grants,  private  gifts,  and  donations  from  any  other  source.  Unless  the  use  of  the 
money  is  restricted  or  subject  to  any  limitations  provided  by  law,  the  board 
may  spend  it  for  the  administration  of  this  chapter  or  may,  by  grant,  contract, 
or  cooperative  arrangement,  use  the  money  to  encourage  research  and  develop- 
ment by  a  public  or  private  agency. 

§  14.022.  Disposition  of  License  and  Permit  Fees 

The  board  shall  deposit  all  license  and  permit  fees  in  the  state  treasury. 
§  l.'f.023.  Oaths  of  Witnesses;  Subpoenas 

(a)  In  conducting  any  hearing,  the  board  or  a  representative  designated  by 
it  may  administer  oaths  and  examine  witnesses. 

(b)  The  board  or  a  representative  designated  by  it  may  issue  subpoenas  to 
compel  the  attendance  of  witnesses  and  the  production  of  books,  records,  docu- 
ments, and  instruments. 

Subchapter  C.  Licenses  and  Permits 

§  lJf.0  'tl.  License  and  Permit  Required 

Except  as  provided  by  regulation  of  the  board  under  Section  14.042  of  this 
code,  no  person  may  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control : 

(1)  without  a  weather  modification  license  and  a  weather  modification  permit 
issued  by  the  board ;  or 

(2)  in  violation  of  any  term  or  condition  of  the  license  or  the  permit. 

§  14.042.  Exemptions 

The  board,  to  the  extent  it  considers  exemptions  practical,  shall  provide  by 
regulation  for  exempting  the  following  activities  from  the  license  and  permit 
requirements  of  this  chapter  : 

(1)  research,  development,  and  experiments  conducted  by  state  and 
federal  agencies,  institutions  of  higher  learning,  and  bona  fide  nonprofit 
research  organizations ; 

(2)  laboratory  research  and  experiments  ; 

(3)  activities  of  an  emergent  nature  for  protection  against  fire,  frost, 
isleet  ,or  fog ;  and 

(4)  activities  normally  conducted  for  purposes  other  than  inducing,  in- 
creasing, decreasing,  or  preventing  precipitation  or  hail. 

§  14.04s.  Issuance  of  License 

(a)  The  board,  in  accordance  with  its  regulations,  shall  issue  a  weather  modi- 
fication license  to  each  applicant  who  : 

(1)  pays  the  license  fee ;  and 

(2)  demonstrates,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  board,  competence  in  the  field 
of  meteorology  which  is  reasonably  necessary  to  engage  in  weather  modifi- 
cation and  control  activities. 

(b)  If  the  applicant  is  an  organization,  the  competence  must  be  demonstrated 
by  the  individual  or  individuals  who  are  to  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  the 
operation  for  the  applicant. 

§  14.044.  License  Fee 

The  fee  for  an  original  or  renewal  license  is  $50. 
§  14.045.  Expiration  Date 

Each  original  or  renewal  license  expires  at  the  end  of  the  state  fiscal  year  for 
which  it  was  issued. 


610 


§  llf.0^6.  Renewal  License 

At  the  expiration  of  the  license  period,  the  board  shall  issue  a  renewal  license 
to  each  applicant  who  pays  the  license  fee  and  who  was  the  qualifications  neces- 
sary for  issuance  of  an  original  license. 

§  lJf.OGl.  Issuance  of  Permit 

(a)  The  board,  in  accordance  with  its  regulations,  and  upon  a  finding  that  the 
weather  modification  and  control  operation  as  proposd  in  the  permit  application 
will  not  significantly  dissipate  the  clouds  and  j>revent  their  natural  course  of  de- 
veloping rain  in  the  area  where  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  to  the  material 
detriment  of  persons  or  property  in  that  area,  may  issue  a  weather  modification 
permit  to  each  applicant  who  : 

(1)  holds  a  valid  weather  modification  license ; 

(2)  pays  the  permit  fee ; 

(3)  publishes  a  notice  of  intention  and  submits  proof  of  publication  as  re- 
quired by  this  chapter ;  and 

(4)  furnishes  proof  of  financial  responsibility. 

(b)  The  Board  shall,  if  requested  by  at  least  25  persons,  hold  at  least  one  public 
hearing  in  the  area  where  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  prior  to  the  issuance 
of  a  permit. 

Amended  by  Acts  1975,  64th  Leg.,  p.  13,94,  ch.  538,  §  2,  eff.  Sept.  1,  1975. 

1975  Amendment.  Substituted,  in  present  subsec.  (a),  "and  upon  finding  that  the 
weather  *  *  *  persons  or  property  in  that  area,  may"  for  "shall"  and  added  subsec.  (b). 

§  Vh062.  Permit  Fee 

The  fee  for  each  permit  is  $25. 
§  1^.063.  Scope  of  Permit 

A  separate  permit  is  required  for  each  operation.  If  an  operation  is  to  be  con- 
ducted under  contract,  a  permit  is  required  for  each  separate  contract.  The  board 
shall  not  issue  a  permit  for  a  contracted  operation  unless  it  covers  a  continuous 
period  not  to  exceed  four  years. 

Amended  by  Acts  1975,  64th  Leg.,  P.  1395,  ch.  538.  §  3,  eff.  Sept.  1,  1975. 
1975  Amendment.  Substituted  "four  years"  for  "one  year". 

§  14.O64.  Application  and  Notice  of  Intention 

Before  undertaken  any  operation,  a  licensee  shall  file  an  application  for  a  per- 
mit and  shall  have  a  notice  of  intention  published  as  required  by  this  chapter. 

§  1^.065.    Content  of  Notice 
In  the  notice  of  intention  the  applicant  shall  include : 

(1)  the  name  and  address  of  the  licensee ; 

(2)  the  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or 
organization  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted ; 

(3)  the  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  opera- 
tion is  to  be  conducted ; 

(4)  the  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation ;  and 

(5)  the  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation. 

§  14.066.    Publication  of  Notice 

The  notice  of  intention  shall  be  published  at  least  once  a  week  for  three  con- 
secutive weeks  in  a  newspaper  of  general  circulation  published  in  each  county 
in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  each  county  which  includes  any 
part  of  the  affected  area.  If  in  any  county  no  newspaper  of  general  circulation  is 
published,  then  publication  shall  be  made  in  a  newspaper  having  general  circu- 
lation in  the  county. 

%U,.061.    Proof  of  Publication;  Affidavit 

The  applicant  shall  file  proof  of  the  publication,  together  with  the  publishers' 
affidavits,  with  the  board  during  the  15-day  period  immediately  following  the  date 
of  the  last  publication. 

§  1J/.068.    Proof  of  Financial  Responsibility 

Proof  of  financial  responsibility  is  made  by  showing,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
executive  director  of  the  board,  that  the  licensee  has  the  ability  to  respond  in 
damages  for  liability  which  might  reasonably  result  from  the  operation  for  which 
the  permit  is  sought. 


611 


§  14-069.    Modification  of  Permit 
The  board  may  modify  the  terms  and  conditions  of  a  permit  if : 

(1)  the  licensee  is  first  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a 
hearing  on  the  need  for  a  modification ;  and 

(2)  it  appears  to  the  board  that  a  modification  is  necessary  to  protect  the 
health  or  property  of  any  person. 

§  14-070.    Scope  of  Activity 

Once  a  permit  is  issued,  the  licensee  shall  confine  his  activities  substantially 
within  the  limits  of  time  and  area  specified  in  the  notice  of  intention,  except  to  the 
extent  that  the  limits  are  modified  by  the  board.  He  shall  also  comply  with  any 
terms  and  conditions  of  the  permit  as  originally  issued  or  as  subsequently  modi- 
fied by  the  board. 

§  14-071.    Records  and  Reports 

(a)  A  licensee  shall  keep  a  record  of  each  operation  conducted  under  permit, 
showing : 

(1)  the  method  employed  ; 

(2)  the  type  of  equipment  used  ; 

(3)  the  kind  and  amount  of  each  material  used  ; 

(4)  the  times  and  places  the  equipment  is  operated ; 

(5)  the  name  and  post-office  address  of  each  individual,  other  than  the 
licensee,  who  participates  or  assists  in  the  operation ;  and 

(6)  other  information  required  by  the  board. 

(b)  The  board  shall  require  written  reports  covering  each  operation,  whether 
it  is  exempt  or  conducted  under  a  permit. 

(c)  At  the  time  and  in  the  manner  required  by  the  board,  a  licensee  shall  sub- 
mit a  written  report  containing  the  information  described  in  subsection  (a)  of 
this  section. 

(d)  All  information  on  an  operation  shall  be  submitted  to  the  board  before  it  is 
released  to  the  public. 

(e)  The  reports  and  records  in  the  custody  of  the  board  shall  be  kept  open  for 
public  inspection. 

Subchapter  D.  Sanctions 
§  14-091.    Suspension;  Revocation;  Refusal  to  Renew 

(a)  The  board  may  suspend  or  revoke  a  license  or  permit  if  it  appears  that  the 
licensee : 

(1)  no  longer  has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  an  origi- 
nal license  or  permit ;  or 

(2)  has  violated  any  provision  of  this  chapter. 

(b)  The  board  may  refuse  to  renew  the  license  of,  or  to  issue  another  permit 
to,  any  applicant  who  has  failed  to  comply  with  any  provision  of  this  chapter. 

§  14-092.    Hearing  Required 

The  board  may  not  suspend  or  revoke  a  license  or  permit  without  first  giving 
the  licensee  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  to  be  heard  with  respect  to  the 
grounds  for  the  board's  proposed  action. 

§  14.093.    Record  of  Hearing 

The  board  shall  have  a  record  made  of  all  proceedings  at  each  hearing  held  un- 
der Section  14.092  of  this  code,  and  shall  have  the  record  filed  with  its  findings 
and  conclusions. 

§  14.101.    Immunity  of  State 

The  state  and  its  officers  and  employees  are  immune  from  liability  for  all 
weather  modification  and  control  activities  conducted  by  private  persons  and 
groups. 

§  14.102.    Private  Legal  Relationships 

(a)  This  chapter  does  not  affect  private  legal  relationships,  except  that  an 
operation  conducted  under  the  license  and  permit  requirements  of  this  chapter 
is  not  an  ultrahazardous  activity  which  makes  the  participants  subject  to  lia- 
bility without  fault. 

(b)  The  fact  that  a  person  holds  a  license  or  permit  under  this  chapter,  or  that 
he  has  complied  with  this  chapter  or  the  regulations  issued  under  this  chapter,  is 
not  admissible  as  evidence  in  any  legal  proceeding  brought  against  him. 


612 


§  U.111.  Penalty 

(a)  A.person  who  violates  any  provision  of  this  chapter  or  any  valid  regulation 
or  order  issued  under  this  chapter  is  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  upon  convic- 
tion is  punishable  by  a  line  of  not  less  than  $100  nor  more  than  $1,000,  or  by  con- 
finement in  the  county  jail  for  not  more  than  10  days,  or  by  both. 

(b)  A  separate  offense  is  committed  each  day  a  violation  continues. 

§  14.112.    Enforcement  oy  Board 

(a)  Whenever  it  appears  that,  a  person  has  violated  or  is  violating,  or  is 
threatening  to  violate,  any  provision  of  this  chapter  or  any  regulation,  license, 
permit,  or  order  of  the  board,  then  the  board,  or  the  executive  director  when  au- 
thorized by  the  board,  may  have  a  civil  suit  instituted  in  a  district  court  for  in- 
junctive relief  to  restrain  the  person  from  continuing  the  violation  or  threat  of 
violation,  or  for  the  assessment  and  recovery  of  a  civil  penalty  of  not  less  than  $50 
nor  more  than  $1,000  for  each  act  of  violation  and  for  each  day  of  violation,  or 
for  both  injunctive  relief  and  civil  penalty. 

(b)  Upon  application  for  injunctive  relief  and  a  finding  that  a  person  is  vio- 
lating or  threatening  to  violate  any  provision  of  this  chapter  or  any  regulation, 
license,  permit,  or  order  of  the  board,  the  district  court  shall  grant  the  injunctive 
relief  the  facts  may  warrant. 

(c)  At  the  request  of  the  board,  or  the  executive  director  when  authorized  by 
the  board,  the  attorney  general  shall  institute  and  conduct  a  suit  in  the  name 
of  the  State  of  Texas  for  injunctive  relief  or  to  recover  the  civil  penalty  or  for 
both  injunctive  relief  and  penalty,  as  authorized  in  Subsection  (a)  of  this  section. 
Added  by  Acts  1971,  62nd  Leg.,  p.  1769,  ch.  51S,  §  11,  eff.  May  31,  1971. 


Utah 


Utah  Code  Ann.  §§  73-15-3-73-15-8 

Chapter  15 — Modification  of  Weather 

Sec. 

73—15-3.  Cloud  seeding  to  increase  precipitation — Control  of  division  of  water  rosources — 
Powers  and  authority  of  division — "Cloud  seeding"  and  •"cloud-seeding  proj- 
ect" defined. 

73-15—4.    Water  from  cloud  seeding  same  as  natural  precipitation — Notice  of  intent  prior 

to  cloud-seeding  project. 
73-15-5.    Transfer  of  records  and  data  to  division — Establishment  of  reporting  and  record 

keeping  procedures. 
73-1 5-6.    Cloud-seeding  contractors — Registration. 

73-15-7.  Precipitation  caused  by  authorized  project  not  presumed  to  constitute  trespass 
or  nuisance. 

73-15-8.    Cloud  seeding  in  Utah  to  target  area  in  adjoining  state. 
73-15-1, 73-15-2.  Repealed. 

Repeal:;  Sections  73-15-1  and  73-15-2  (L».  1953.  ch.  129,  §§1,  2),  relating  to 
reports  to  the  department  of  meterology,  state  school  of  mines,  of  weather  modifi- 
cation activities,  were  repealed  by  Laws  1973,  ch.  193,  §  7.  For  present  provisions, 
see  73-15-3  et  seq. 

73-15-3.  Cloud  seeding  to  increase  precipitation — Control  of  division  of  icatcr 
fesdiirccs — Powers  and  authority  of  division — "Cloud  needing"  and  "cloud-seeding 
project"  defined. — The  state  of  Utah  through  the  division  of  water  resources  shall 
be  the  only  entity,  private  or  public,  that  shall  have  authority  to  authorize,  spon- 
sor, and/or  develop  cloud-seeding  research,  evaluation,  or  implementation  proj- 
ects to  alter  precipitation,  cloud  forms,  or  meteorological  parameters  within  the 
state  of  Utah,  except  cloud  seeding  for  the  suppression  of  fog  is  excluded.  The 
division  of  water  resources  shall  authorize,  sponsor,  and/or  develop  local  or  state- 
wide cloud-seeding  projects  that  conform  to  over-all  state  water  planning  objec- 
tives and  are  determined  to  be  feasible  by  the  division  of  water  resources.  The 
division  of  water  resources  may  contract  with  the  Utah  water  research  labora- 
tory or  any  other  individual  or  organization  for  consultation  and/or  assistance  in 
developing  cloud-seeding  projects  or  in  furthering  neces-arv  research  of  cloud 
seeding  or  other  factors  that  may  be  affected  by  cloud-seeding  activities.  Cloud 
seedinjg  as  used  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  mean  all  acts  undertaken  to  arti- 
ficially distribute  or  create  nuclei  in  cloud  masses  for  the  purposes  of  altering 
precipitation,  cloud  forms,  or  other  meteorological  parameters.  A  cloud-see;iiiig 
project  as  used  in  this  act  shall  be  a  planned  project  to  evaluate  meteorological 
conditions,  perform  c  loud  seeding,  and  evaluate  results. 

7.J-/J-.}.  Watt*  from  cloud  seeding  same  as  natural  precipitation — Notice  of 
intent  prior  to  cloud-seeding  project. — All  water  derived  as  a  result  of  cloud 


613 


seeding  shall  be  considered  as  a  part  of  Utah's  basic  water  supply  the  same  as  all 
natural  precipitation  water  supplies  have  been  heretofore,  and  all  statutory  pro- 
visions that  apply  to  water  from  natural  precipitation  shall  also  apply  to  water 
derived  from  cloud  seeding.  A  notice  of  intent  shall  be  hied  with  the  division  of 
water  rights  prior  to  the  commencement  of  a  cloud-seeding  project. 
History  :    L.  1973,  ch.  193,  §  2. 

13-15-5.  Transfer  of  records  and  data  to  division — Establishment  of  report- 
ing and  record  keeping  procedures. — All  records  and  data  collected  by  depart- 
ment of  meteorology  of  the  state  school  of  mines  and  mineral  industries  of  the 
University  of  Utah  since  the  enactment  of  sections  73-15-1  and  73-15-2  shall  be 
transferred  to  the  division  of  water  resources,  there  to  be  a  permanent  record.  The 
division  of  water  resources  shall  establish  forms  and/or  criteria  for  reporting 
data  and  record  keeping  and  cause  that  a  permanent  record  is  kept  of  all  per- 
tinent data  related  to  cloud-seeding  projects,  cloud-seeding  research  projects,  or 
research  related  to  other  factors  that  may  be  affected  by  cloud-seeding  activities. 

History  :  L.  1973,  ch.  193,  §  3. 

73-15-6  Cloud-seeding  contractors — Registration. — Any  individual  or  orga- 
nization that  would  like  to  become  a  cloud-seeding  contractor  in  the  state  of  Utah 
shall  register  with  the  division  of  water  resources.  As  a  part  of  the  registration 
the  applicant  shall  meet  qualifications  established  by  the  division  of  water  re- 
sources and  submit  proof  of  financial  responsibility  in  order  to  give  reasonable 
assurance  of  protection  to  the  public  in  the  event  it  should  be  established  that 
damages  were  caused  to  third  parties  as  a  result  of  negligence  in  carrying  out  a 
cloud-seeding  project. 

History  :  L.  1973,  ch.  103,  §  4. 

13-15-7  Precipitation  caused  by  authorized  project  not  presumed  to  emistitute 
trespass  or  nuisance. — The  mere  dissemination  of  materials  and  substances  into 
the  atmosphere  or  causing  precipitation  pursuant  to  an  authorized  cloud-seeding 
project  shall  not  give  rise  to  any  presumption  that  such  use  of  the  atmosphere  or 
lands  constitutes  trespass  or  involves  an  actionable  or  enjoinable  public  or  private 
nuisance. 

History  :  L.  1973,  ch.  193,  §  5. 

73-15-8  Cloud  seeding  in  Utah  to  target  area  in  adjoining  state. — Cloud  seed- 
ing in  Utah  to  target  an  area  in  an  adjoining  state  is  prohibited  except  upon  full 
compliance  of  the  laws  of  the  target  area  state  the  same  is  if  the  cloud-seeding 
operation  took  place  in  the  target  area  state,  as  well  as  the  other  provisions  of 
this  act. 

History  :  L.  1973,  ch.  193,  §  6. 

Repealing  Clause.  Section  7  of  T-nws  1973.  ch.  193  provided:  "Sections  73-15-1 
and  73-15-2.  Utah  Code  Annotated  1953,  as  enacted  by  chapter  129,  Laws  of  Utah 
1953,  is  repealed." 

WASinxoTox 

Wash.  Rev.  Code  Ann.  §§  43.37.010-43.37.200;  43-27A.080(6) ;  43.27A.180(1) 

Chapter  43.37 — Weather  Modification  Board 

Sec. 

43.37.010  Definitions. 

43.37.020    Bonrd   established — Composition,   appointment,   qualifications,  compensation, 

quorum. 
43.37.030    Powers  and  duties. 

43.37.040    Promotion  of  research  and  development  activities,  contracts  and  agreements. 
43.37.050    Hearing  procedure. 

43.37.060    Acceptance  of  sifts,  donations,  etc. — Weather  modification  board  revolving  ac- 
count established,  excess  fees. 
43.37.070    Staff  services,  materials,  office  space — Expenses. 
43.37.0S0    License  and  permit  required. 
43.37.090  Exemptions. 

43.37.100    Licenses — Requirements,  duration,  renewal,  fees. 
42.37.110    Permits — Requirements — Hearings  as  to  issuance. 

43.37.120    Separate  permit  for  each  operation — Filing  and  publishing  notice  of  intention — 

Activities  restricted  by  permit  and  notice. 
43.37.1 30    Notice  of  intention — Contents. 

43.37.140  Publication. 

42 .37.1  FiO    Financial  responsibility. 

43.37.160    Fees — Sanctions  for  failure  to  pay. 

43.37.170    Records  and  renorts — Open  to  public  examination. 

42.37.1S0    Revocation,  suspension,  modification  of  license  or  permit. 

43.37.100    Liability  of  state  denied — Legal  rights  of  private  person  not  affected. 

43.37.200  Penalty. 

43.37.010  Definitions 
As  used  in  this  chapter,  unless  the  context  requires  otherwise : 
(1)  "Department"  means  the  department  of  ecology  ; 


614 


(2)  "Operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  pursuant  to  a  single  contract  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing 
or  attempting  to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area 
over  one  continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  year ;  or,  in  case  the  per- 
formance of  weather  modification  and  control  activities  is  to  be  undertaken  in- 
dividually or  jointly  by  a  person  or  persons  to  be  benefited  and  not  undertaken 
pursuant  to  a  contract,  "operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modifi- 
cation and  control  activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempt- 
ing to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one 
continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  year ; 

(3)  "Research  and  development''  means  theoretical  analysis  exploration  and 
experimentation,  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and 
demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of 
models,  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  processes  ; 

(4)  "Weather  modification  and  control"  means  changing  or  controlling,  or  at- 
tempting to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods,  the  natural  development  of 
any  or  all  atmospheric  cloud  forms  or  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in  the 
troposphere.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch.  64  §  1,  effective  July  1.  1973.] 

4S.37.020    Board  established — Composition,  appointment,  aualifteations,  eompen- 
sation,  quorum 

(1)  There  is  established  a  weather  modification  board  to  consist  of  the  director 
of  conservation,  who  shall  be  the  chairman  and  wiio  shall  exercise  no  vote  except 
in  case  of  a  tie  vote,  nine  members  all  appointed  by  the  governor,  including  a 
member  of  the  faculty  of  Washington  State  University,  a  member  of  the  faculty 
of  the  University  of  Washington,  one  member  to  be  a  person  experienced  in.  and 
actually  engaged  in  the  commercial  production  of  horticultural  products,  three 
members  to  be  persons  experienced  in,  and  actually  engaged  in  the  commercial 
production  of  other  agricultural  products,  and  three  members  representing  the 
general  public.  Members  appointed  to  represent  horticulture,  other  agricultural 
products,  and  the  general  public,  shall  each  represent  a  different  congressional 
district  in  order  that  each  congressional  district  of  the  state  shall  be  represented 
by  one  such  appointee.  The  term  of  office  of  each  member  of  the  board  appointed 
prior  to  March  3.  1961  shall  be  four  years,  except  that  the  first  terms  of  office  of 
such  appointed  members  first  taking  office  shall  expire,  as  determined  by  the  gov- 
ernor at  the  time  of  their  appointment,  one  each  at  the  end  of  the  first,  second, 
third  and  fourth  years  after  March  3,  1957.  The  term  of  office  of  each  member 
appointed  to  the  board  as  an  additional  member  because  of  this  amendatory  act 
[1061  c  1954  §  1]  shall  be  four  years,  except  that  the  first  terms  of  office  of  such 
appointed  members  first  taking  office  shall  expire,  as  determined  by  the  governor 
at  the  time  of  their  appointment,  two  at  the  end  of  the  first  year  after  March  3. 
1961,  and  one  each  at  the  end  of  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  years  after  March  3. 
1961.  Any  member  appointed  to  fill  a  vacancy  occurring  prior  to  the  expiration 
of  the  term  for  which  his  predecessor  was  appointed  shall  be  appointed  for  the 
remainder  of  such  term. 

(2)  Members  of  the  board  shall  receive  no  compensation  for  the  performance 
of  their  duties  under  the  provisions  of  this  chapter;  but  each  member  shall  be 
reimbursed,  to  the  extent  allowed  by  law  from  funds  available  for  the  adminis- 
tration of  this  chapter,  for  expenses  necessarily  incurred  in  the  performance  of 
his  duties. 

(3)  A  majority  of  the  members  shall  constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction 
of  business. 

17.030    rowers  and  duties 

In  the  performance  of  its  functions  the  department  may,  in  addition  to  any 
other  acts  authorized  by  law: 

(D  Establish  advisory  committees  to  advise  with  and  make  recommendations 
to  the  department  concerning  legislation,  policies,  administration,  research,  and 
other  matters ; 

(2)  Establish  by  regulation  or  order  such  standards  and  instructions  to  govern 
the  carrying  out  of  research  or  projects  in  weather  modification  and  control  is 
the  department  may  deem  necessary  or  desirable  to  minimize  danger  to  health 
or  property:  and  make  such  rules  and  regulations  as  are  necessary  in  the  per- 
formance of  its  powers  and  duties; 


615 


(3)  Make  such  studies,  investigations,  obtaiu  such  information,  and  hold  such 
hearings  as  the  department  may  deem  necessary  or  proper  to  assist  it  in  exercis- 
ing its  authority  or  in  the  administration  or  enforcement  of  this  chapter  or  any 
regulations  or  orders  issued,  thereunder ; 

(4)  Appoint  and  fix  the  compensation  of  such  personnel,  including  specialists 
and  consultants,  as  are  necessary  to  perform  its  duties  and  functions : 

(5)  -Acquire,  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  such  materials,  equipment,  and 
facilities  as  are  necessary  to  perforin  its  duties  and  functions ; 

(6 )  Cooperate  with  public  or  private  agencies  in  the  performance  of  the  depart- 
ment's functions  or  duties  and  in  furtherance  of  the  purposes  of  this  chapter ; 

(7)  Represent  the  state  in  any  and  all  matters  pertaining  to  plans,  procedures, 
or  negotiations  for  interstate  compacts  relating  to  weather  modification  and  con- 
trol. [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  2,  effective  July  1,  1973.] 

Ij.^.M.OIfO    Promotion  of  research  mnd  development  activities — Contracts  and 
agreements 

The  department  shall  exercise  its  powers  in  such  manner  as  to  promote  the 
continued  conduct  of  research  and  development  activities  in  the  fields  specified 
below  by  private  or  public  institutions  or  persons  and  to  assist  in  the  acquisition 
of  an  expanding  fund  of  theoretical  and  practical  knowledge  in  such  fields.  To 
this  end  the  department  may  conduct,  and  make  arrangements,  including  con- 
tracts and  agreements,  for  the  conduct  of.  research  and  development  activities 
relating  to : 

(1)  The  theory  and  development  of  methods  of  weather  modification  and  con- 
trol, including  processes,  materials,  and  devices  related  thereto; 

i  -  i  Utilization  of  weather  modification  and  control  for  agricultural,  indus- 
trial, commercial,  and  other  purposes; 

(3)  The  protection  of  life  and  property  during  research  and  operational  activi- 
ties. [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  §  3,  effective  July  1,  1973.] 

Ji3.o7.0o0 — Hearing  procedure 

In  the  case  of  hearings  pursuant  to  RCW  43.37.1S0  the  department  shall,  and 
in  other  cases  may,  cause  a  record  of  the  proceedings  to  be  taken  and  filed  with 
the  department,  together  with  its  findings  and  conclusions.  For  any  hearing,  the 
director  of  the  department  or  a  representative  designated  by  him  is  authorized 
to  administer  oaths  and  affirmations,  examine  witnesses,  and  issue,  in  the  name 
of  the  department,  notice  of  the  hearing  or  subpoenas  requiring  any  person  to 
appear  and  testify,  or  to  appear  and  produce  documents,  or  both,  at  any  desig- 
nated place.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  G4  §  4,  effective  July  1,  1973.] 

43.37.060  Acceptance  of  gifts,  donations,  etc. 

(1)  The  department  may,  subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  imposed  by 
law.  receive  and  accept  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  state  any  funds  which  may 
be  offered  or  become  available  from  federal  grants  or  appropriations,  private 
gifts,  donations,  or  bequests,  or  any  other  source,  and  may  expend  such  funds, 
subject  to  any  limitations  otherwise  provided  by  law,  for  the  encouragement 
of  research  and  development  by  a  state,  public,  or  private  agency,  either  by  direct 
grant,  by  contract  or  other  cooperative  means. 

(2)  All  license  and  permit  fees  paid  to  the  department  shall  be  deposited  in  the 
state  general  fund.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  5,  effective  July  1,  1973.] 

43.37.070  Staff  services,  materials,  office  space — Expenses 

Repealed  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  19,  effective  July  1, 1973. 
43.37.080  License  and  permit  required 

Except  as  provided  in  RCW  43.37.090,  no  person  shall  engage  in  activities  for 
weather  modification  and  control  except  under  and  in  accordance  with  a  license 
and  a  permit  issued  by  the  department  authorizing  such  activities.  [Amended  by 
Laws  1973  ch  64  §  6,  effective  July  1, 1973.] 

43.37.090  Exceptions 

The  department,  to  the  extent  it  deems  practical,  shall  provide  by  regulation 
for  exempting  from  license,  permit,  and  liability  requirements.  (1)  research  and 
development  and  experiments  by  state  and  federal  agencies,  institutions  of  higher 
learning,  and  bona  fide  nonprofit  research  organizations;  (2)  laboratory  re- 
search and  experiments:  (3)  activities  of  an  emergent  character  for  protection 
against  fire,  frost,  sleet,  or  fog;  and  (4)  activities  normally  engaged  in  for  pur- 


616 


poses  other  than  those  of  inducing,  increasing,  decreasing,  or  preventing  precipi- 
tation or  hall.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  §  7,  effective  July  1, 1973.] 

43.37.100  Licenses — Requirements,  duration,  renewal,  fees 

(1)  Licenses  to  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modification  and  control 
shall  be  issued  to  applicants  therefor  who  pay  the  license  fee  required  and  who 
demonstrate  competence  in  the  field  of  meteorology  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
department,  reasonably  necessary  to  engage  in  activities  for  weather  modifica- 
tion and  control.  If  the  applicant  is  an  organization,  these  requirements  must 
be  met  by  the  individual  or  individuals  who  will  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of 
the  operation  for  the  applicant. 

(2)  The  department  shall  issue  licenses  in  accordance  with  such  procedures 
and  subject  to  such  conditions  as  it  may  by  regulation  establish  to  effectuate  the 
provisions  of  this  chapter.  Each  license  shall  be  issued  for  a  period  to  expire 
at  the  end  of  the  calendar  year  in  which  it  is  issued  and.  if  the  licensee  possesses 
the  qualifications  necessary  for  the  issuance  of  a  new  license,  shall  upon  applica- 
tion be  renewed  at  the  expiration  of  such  period.  A  license  shall  be  issued- or 
renewed  only  upon  the  payment  to  the  department  of  one  hundred  dollars  for  the 
license  or  renewal  thereof.  [Amended  of  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  8,  effective  July 
1,  1973.] 

43.37.110    Permits — Requirement? — Hearings  as  to  issuance 

The  department  shall  issue  permits  in  accordance  with  such  procedures  and 
subject  to  such  conditions  as  it  may  by  regulation  establish  to  effectuate  the 
provisions  of  this  chapter  only  : 

(1)  If  the  applicant  is  licensed  pursuant  to  this  chapter  ; 

(2)  If  a  sufficient  notice  of  intention  is  published  and  proof  of  publication  is 
filed  as  required  by  RCW  43.37.140  ; 

(3)  If  the  applicant  furnishes  proof  of  financial  responsibility,  as  provided 
in  RCW  43.37.150,  in  an  amount  to  be  determined  by  the  department  but  not  to- 
exceed  twenty  thousand  dollars ; 

(4)  If  the  fee  for  a  permit  is  paid  as  required  by  RCW  43.37.160; 

(5)  If  the  weather  modification  and  control  activities  to  be  conducted  under 
authority  of  the  permit  are  determined  by  the  department  to  be  for  the  general 
welfare  and  public  good  ; 

(6)  If  the  department  has  held  an  open  public  hearing  in  Olympia  as  to  such 
issuance.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  9,  effective  July  1,  1973.] 

43.37.120  Separate  permit  for  each  operation — Filing  and  publishing  notice  of 
intention — Activities  restricted  by  permit  and  notice 
A  separate  permit  shall  be  issued  for  each  operation.  Prior  to  undertaking 
any  weather  modification  and  control  activities  the  licensee  shall  file  with  the 
department  and  also  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of  intention.  The  licensee, 
if  a  permit  is  issued,  shall  confine  his  activities  for  the  permitted  operation 
within  the  time  and  area  limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention,  unless  modi- 
fied by  the  department ;  and  his  activities  shall  also  conform  to  any  conditions 
imposed  by  the  department  upon  the  issuance  of  the  permit  or  to  the  terms  of 
the  permit  as  modified  after  issuance.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  10,  effec- 
tive July  1,  1973.] 

43.37.130    Notice  of  intention — Contents 

The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth  at  least  all  the  following : 

(1)  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee  ; 

(2)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or  orga- 
nization on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted ; 

(3)  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  operation 
will  be  conducted ; 

(4)  The  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation ; 

(5)  The  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation. 

43.37.140    Notice  of  intention — Publicat ion 

(1)  The  applicant  shall  cause  the  notice  of  intention,  or  that  portion  there- 
of including  the  items  specified  in  RCW  43.37.130,  to  be  published  at  least  once 
a  week  for  three  consecutive  weeks  in  a  legal  newspaper  having  a  general  cir- 
culation and  published  within  any  county  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  c<>n- 
ducted  and  in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or,  if  the  operation  is  to  be  con- 
ducted in  more  than  one  county  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one 
county  or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  which  the  operation  is  to- 


617 


be  conducted,  then  in  a  legal  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  pub- 
lished within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case  there  is  no  legal  newspaper  published 
within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall  be  made  in  a  legal  newspaper 
having  a  general  circulation  within  the  county. 

(2)  Proof  of  publication,  made  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  shall  be  filed 
by  the  licensee  with  the  department  within  fifteen  days  from  the  date  of  the  last 
publication  of  the  notice.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  G4  §  11,  effective  July  1, 
1973.] 

43.37.150    Fina?icial  responsibility 

Proof  of  financial  responsibility  may  be  furnished  by  an  applicant  by  his  show- 
ing, to  the  satisfaction  of  the  department,  his  ability  to  respond  in  damages  for 
liability  which  might  reasonably  be  attached  to  or  result  from  his  weather  modi- 
fication and  control  activities  in  connection  with  the  rperation  for  which  he  seeks 
a  permit.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  12,  effective  July  1,  1973.1 

J{3.31.160    Fees — Sanctions  for  failure  to  pay 

The  fee  to  be  paid  by  each  applicant  for  a  permit  shall  be  equivalent  to  one 
and  one-half  percent  of  the  estimated  cost  of  such  operation,  the  estimated  cost 
to  lie  computed  by  the  department  from  the  evidence  available  to  it.  The  fee  is 
due  and  payable  to  the  department  as  of  the  date  of  the  issuance  of  the  permit; 
however,  if  the  applicant  is  able  to  give  to  the  department  satisfactory  security 
lor  the  payment  of  the  balance,  he  may  be  permitted  to  commence  the  operation, 
and  a  permit  may  be  issued  therefor,  upon  the  payment  of  not  less  than  fifty  per- 
cent of  the  fee.  The  balance  due  shall  be  paid  within  three  months  from  the  date 
of  the  termination  of  the  operation  as  prescribed  in  the  permit.  Failure  to  pay  a 
permit  fee  as  required  shall  be  grounds  for  suspension  or  revocation  of  the  li- 
cence of  the  delinquent  permit  holder  and  grounds  for  refusal  to  renew  his  li- 
cense or  to  issue  any  further  permits  to  such  person.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch 
04  $  13,  effective  July  1.  1973.] 

.'(3.31.170    Reeords  and  reports — Open  to  public  examination 

(1)  Every  licensee  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  con- 
ducted by  him  pursuant  to  his  license  and  each  permit,  showing  the  method 
employed,  the  type  of  equipment  used,  materials  and  amounts  thereof  used,  the 
times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equipment,  the  name  and  post  office  address 
of  each  individual  participating  or  assisting  in  the  operation  other  than  the  li- 
censee, and  such  other  general  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  department 
and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  department  at  the  time  and  in  the  manner 
required. 

( 2)  The  department  shall  require  written  reports  in  such  manner  as  it  provides 
but  not  inconsistent' with  the  provisions  of  this  chapter,  covering  each  operation 
for  which  a  permit  is  issued.  Further,  the  department  shall  require  written  re- 
ports from  such  organizations  as  are  exempted  from  license,  permit,  and  liability 
requirements  as  provided  in  RCW  43.37.090. 

( 3 )  The  reports  and  records  in  the  custody  of  the  department  shall  be  open  for 
public  examination.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  14,  effective  July  1,  1973.1 

43.37.180    Revocation,  suspension,  modification  of  license  or  permit 

(1)  The  department  may  suspend  or  revoke  any  license  or  permit  issued  if 
it  appears  that  the  licensee  no  longer  possesses  the  qualifications  necessary  for 
the  issuance  of  a  new  license  or  permit.  The  department  may  suspend  or  revoke 
any  license  or  permit  if  it  appears  that  the  licensee  has  violated  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  chapter.  Such  suspension  or  revocation  shall  occur  only  after 
notice  to  the  licensee  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  granted  such  licensee  to  be 
heard  respecting  the  grounds  of  the  proposed  suspension  or  revocation.  The  de- 
partment may  refuse  to  renew  the  license  of,  or  to  issue  another  permit  to,  any 
applicant  who  has  failed  to  comply  with  any  provision  of  this  chapter. 

(2)  The  department  may  modify  the  terms  of  a  permit  after  issuance  there- 
of if  the  licensee  is  first  given  notice  and  a  reasonable  opportunity  for  a  hearing 
respecting  the  grounds  for  the  proposed  modification  and  if  it  appears  to  the 
department  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  health  or  the  property  of 
any  person  to  make  the  modification  proposed.  [Amended  by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  15, 
effective  July  1,  1973.1 

43.37.190    Liability  of  state  denied — Legal  rights  of  private  persons  not  affected 
Nothing  in  this  chapter  shall  be  construed  to  impose  or  accept  any  liability 
or  responsibility  on  the  part  of  the  state,  the  department,  or  any  state  officials 


613 


or  employees  for  any  weather  modification  and  control  activities  of  any  private 
person  or  group,  nor  to  affect  in  any  way  any  contractual,  tortious,  or  other  legal 
rights,  duties,  or  liahilities  between  any  private  persons  or  groups.  [Amended  by 
Laws  1973  ch  64  §  16,  effective  July  1, 1973.1 

.',3.37.900    Revolving  account  abolished 

The  weather  modification  board  revolving  account  is  hereby  abolished.  Any 
funds  remaining  in  such  account  shall  be  transferred  to  the  general  fund.  [Added 
by  Laws  1973  ch  64  §  17,  effective  July  1, 1973.1 

.',3.37.200    Penal  in 

Any  person  violating  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  or  any  lawful  reg- 
ulation or  order  issued  pursuant  thereto,  shall  lie  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor :  and 
a  continuing  violation  is  punishable  as  a  separate  offense  for  each  day  during 
which  it  occurs. 

'/3.27A.080  Powers,  duties,  functions  of  certain  state  agencies  transferred  to 
department — Columbia  basin  division 
The  department  shall  exercise  the  powers,  duties  and  functions,  through  divi- 
sions as  provided  for  in  RCW  43.27A.070  of  the  following  state  agencies  or  divi- 
sion of  state  agencies,  and  public  officials,  and  all  their  powers,  duties  and 
functions  are  transferred  to  the  department  ofsvater  resources  : 

(1)  The  division  of  reclamation  of  the  department  of  conservation; 

(2)  The  division  of  water  resources  of  the  department  of  conservation  ; 

(3)  The  division  of  flood  control  of  the  department  of  conservation  ; 

(4)  The  division  of  power  resources  of  the  department  of  conservation  ; 

(5)  The  Columbia  basin  commission  ; 

(6)  The  weather  modification  board ; 

All  other  powers,  duties  or  functions  now  vested  in  the  department  of  con- 
servation or  the  director  thereof  are  transferred  to  the  department  of  water  re- 
sources, except  those  powers  which  are  expressly  transferred  to  some  other  agency 
of  the  state  by  this  chapter.  The  director  in  exercising  the  powers,  duties  and 
functions  of  the  Columbia  basin  commission  as  set  forfli  in  chapter  43.49  RCW 
may  create  and  maintain  in  the  department  a  Columbia  basin  division. 

'/3.27A.180    Agencies  abolished 
On  July  1,  1967,  the  following  state  agencies  are  abolished  : 

(1)  Weather  modification  board. 

(2)  Columbia  basin  commission. 

(3)  Power  advisory  committee. 

(4)  Department  of  conservation. 


West  Virginia 
W.  Va.  Code  §§  29-2B-1— 29-2B-15 


Article  2B — Weather  Modification 

Sec. 

29-2B-1.    Declaration  of  policy. 
29-2B-2.  Definitions. 

29-2B-3.    Administration  by  director  and  commission. 
29-2B-4.    When  license  and  registration  of  equipment  required. 
L.'!)-2B-r>.    Application  for  license. 
29-2B-6.    Registration  of  equipment. 

29-2B-7.    Publication  of  notice  of  intention  to  undertake  operation. 

29  2B-  8.    Permission  to  undertake  emergency  project  without  compliance  with  §  29-2B  -7 

29-2B-9.     Records  and  reports. 

29-2B-10.  Research  projects  ;  safetv. 

29-2B-11.  Enforcement  of  article. 

29-2B-12.  Suspension  or  revocation  of  license. 

29  2B— 13.  Compensation  for  damage. 

29-2B-14.  Acts  not  authorized. 

29-2B-15.  Offenses  and  penalties. 

§  29-2B-1.    Declaration  of  policy 

The  public  interest,  health,  safety,  welfare  and  necessity  require  that  scientific 
experimentation  in  the  field  of  artificial  nucleation,  and  that  scientific  efforts 
to  develop  and  increase  natural  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or  water  in 
any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere,  within  the  State,  be  encouraged  in  order 
to  develop,  conserve,  and  protect  the  natural  water  resources  of  the  State  and  to 
safeguard  life  and  property.  (1969,  c.  18.) 


619 


§  29-2B-2.  Definitions 
As  used  in  this  article : 

(a)  "Director"  means  the  director  of  aeronautics. 

(b)  "Commission"  means  the  West  Virginia  aeronautics  commission. 

(c)  "Operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  pursuant  to  a  single  contract  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing, 
or  attempting  to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area 
over  one  continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  year,  or,  if  the  performance 
of  weather  modification  and  control  activities  is  to  be  undertaken  individually  or 
jointly  by  a  person  or  persons  to  be  benefited  and  not  undertaken  pursuant  to  a 
contract,  "operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting  to  produce,  a 
certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  over  one  continuing  time 
interval  not  exceeding  one  year. 

(d)  "Person"  means  any  individual,  firm,  association,  organization,  partner- 
ship, company,  corporation,  private  or  public,  political  subdivision,  or  other  public 
agency. 

(e)  "Research  and  development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration  and 
experimentation  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and  dem- 
onstration purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of  models, 
devices,  equipment,  materials  and  processes. 

(f)  "Weather  modification  and  control"  means  changing  or  controlling,  or  at- 
tempting to  change  or  control,  by  artificial  methods  the  natural  development  of 
any  or  all  atmospheric  cloud  forms  and  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in  the 
troposphere.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-3.    Administration  by  director  and  commission 

The  director  shall  administer  this  article  under  the  supervision  of  the  commis- 
sion. (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-4.    When  license  and  registration  of  equipment  required 

(a)  Xo  person,  without  first  securing  a  license  from  the  commission,  shall 
cause  or  attempt  to  cause  condensation  or  precipitation  of  rain,  snow,  moisture,  or 
water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere. 

(b)  Xo  person  without  registering  with  the  commission  shall  have  in  his  pos- 
session any  cloud  seeding  equipment  unless  he  is  an  employee  of  or  under  contract 
with  a  person  conducting  a  weather  modification  and  control  operation  who  has 
been  granted  a  license  by  the  commission.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-5.    Application  for  license;  renewal;  temporary  suspension 

(a)  Any  person  desiring  to  do  any  of  the  acts  specified  in  section  four  [§  29- 
2B— 1]  of  this  article  may  file  with  the  director  an  application  in  writing  for  a 
license.  Each  application  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  filing  fee  fixed  by  the  com- 
mission but  not  to  exceed  one  hundred  dollars,  and  shall  be  on  a  form  to  be  sup- 
plied for  such  purpose  by  the  director. 

(b)  Every  application  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following : 

(1)  The  name  and  post-office  address  of  the  applicant. 

(2)  The  previous  education,  experience  and  qualifications  of  the  applicant 
or,  if  the  applicant  is  other  than  an  individual,  the  previous  education,  ex- 
perience and  qualifications  of  the  persons  who  will  be  in  control  of  and 
charged  with  the  operations  of  the  applicant.  Previous  experience  includes 
subcontracting  or  counseling  services. 

(3)  A  general  description  of  the  operations  which  the  applicant  intends  to 
conduct  and  the  method  and  type  of  equipment,  including  all  nucleating 
agents,  that  the  applicant  proposes  to  use.  Aircraft  must  be  listed  by  numbers 
and  pilots'  names. 

(4)  A  statement  listing  all  employees  who  are  residents  of  West  Virginia 
or  who  will  be  directly  employed  in  the  intended  operation,  or  both. 

(5)  A  bond  or  insurance  covering  any  damage  the  licensee  may  cause 
through  his  operations  in  an  amount  of  fifteen  thousand  dollars  or  other  evi- 
dence of  financial  responsibility  shall  be  furnished  and  executed  at  the  time 
of  the  grant  of  the  license :  Provided,  that  no  bond  shall  be  required  of  any 
person  who  shall  cause  or  attempt  to  cause  condensation  or  precipitation  of 
rain,  snow,  moisture  or  water  in  any  form  contained  in  the  atmosphere  over 
any  landing  strip  or  runway  of  any  airport  or  any  approach  thereto  in  an 
effort  to  improve  the  visibility  above  the  landing  strip,  runway  or  approach. 

(6)  Every  applicant  shall  have  a  resident  agent  within  this  State. 


620 


(e)  Upon  the  filing  of  the  application  upon  a  form  supplied  by  the  director  and 
•containing  the  information  prescribed  by  this  article  and  accompanied  by  the 
required  filing  fee  and  bond  or  insurance,  the  director  may  issue  a  license  to  the 
applicant  entitling  the  applicant  to  conduct  the  operations  described  in  the  ap- 
plication for  the  calendar  year  for  which  the  license  is  issued,  unless  the  license 
is  sooner  revoked,  suspended  or  modified. 

(d)  A  license  may  be  renewed  annually  upon  application  to  the  director,  ac- 
companied by  a  renewal  fee  fixed  by  the  commission  but  not  to  exceed  one  hun- 
dred dollars,  on  or  before  the  last  day  of  January  of  the  calendar  year  for  which 
the  license  is  renewed. 

(e)  Any  license  granted  under  this  section  shall  be  subject  to  temporary  sus- 
pension by  the  director.  Such  suspension  may  occur  whenever  the  director  is  noti- 
fied by  the  office  of  emergency  services  that,  within  an  area  defined  by  the  office 
of  eniergency  services,  precipitation  or  other  effects  of  weather  modification  op- 
erations would  be  likely  to  cause  or  aggravate  a  potential  or  ongoing  disaster 
Any  such  suspension  shall  continue  until  the  director  is  notified  by  the  office  of 
emergency  services  that  the  disaster  or  threat  of  disaster  has  passed.  Should  any 
license  be  suspended  under  this  subsection,  the  prohibitions  of  section  four  [§  29- 
2B-,4]  and  penalties  of  section  fifteen  [§29-2B-15]  of  this  article  shall  become 

I  ive  immediately.  (19G9,  c.  18  ;  1973,  c.  50.) 

§  29-2  Ji-G.    Registration  of  equipment 

Every  person  not  desiring  a  license  who  owns  or  possesses  cloud  seeding  equip- 
ment, shall  promptly  register  the  same  with  the  director  on  a  form  furnished  by 
him.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-7.    Publication  of  notice  of  intention  to  undertake  operation. 

(a)  Prior  to  undertaking  any  operation  authorized  by  the  license,  the  licensee 
shall  file  with  the  director  and  cause  to  be  published  a  notice  of  intention.  The 
licensee  shall  then  confine  his  activities  for  that  operation  substantially  within 
the  time  and  area  limits  set  forth  in  the  notice  of  intention. 

(b)  The  notice  of  intention  shall  set  forth  all  of  the  following: 

(1)  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee. 

(2)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or 
persons  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted. 

(3)  The  area  in  which  and  the  approximate  time  during  which  the  opera- 
tion will  be  conducted. 

(4)  The  area  which  will  be  affected  by  the  operation  as  near  as  the  same 
may  be  determined  in  advance. 

(e)  The  notice  of  intention  required  by  this  section  shall  be  published  as  a 
Class  III  legal  advertisement  and  the  publication  area  shall  be  the  county  where- 
in the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or, 
if  (lie  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in  more  than  one  county  or  if  the  affected  area 
is  located  in  more  than  one  county  or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in 
which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted,  then  such  notice  shall  be  published  in  like 
manner  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  within  each  of  such  counties. 

td)  Proof  of  publication  shall  be  filed  by  the  licensee  with  the  director  within 
fifteen  days  from  the  date  of  the  last  publication  of  the  notice.  Proof  of  publica- 
tion shall  be  by  copy  of  the  notice  as  published,  attached  to  and  made  a  part  of 
the  affidavit  of  the  publisher  or  foreman  of  the  newspaper  publishing  the  notice. 
H9G9.  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-8.    Permission  to  undertake  emergency  project  without  compliance  irifh 
§  29-2B-7. 

fa)  Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  this  article  to  the  contrary,  the  director 
may  grant  a  licensee  permission  to  undertake  an  emergency  niicleation  project, 
without  prior  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  section  seven 
[§29-2P>-71.  subsection  (a),  if  the  same  appears  to  the  commissioner  to  be  neces- 
sary or  desirable  in  aid  of  extinguishment  of  fires. 

(  b)  Notwithstanding  any  provision  of  this  article  to  the  contrary,  upon  request 
of  the  county  commissioners  of  a  county  or  of  the  governing  body  of  a  city,  bor- 
ough, town  or  township,  and  upon  the  submission  of  such  supporting  evidence  as 
I  he  commission  may  require,  the  commission  may  grant  a  licensee  permission  to 
undertake  a  nucleation  project  for  the  purpose  of  alleviating  a  drought  emer- 
gency, without  prior  compliance  by  the  licensee  with  the  provisions  of  section 
seven  [§29-2P>-7],  subsection  (a),  requiring  publication  of  notice  of  intention, 
if  such  project  appears  to  the  department  to  be  necessary  or  desirable. 

(c)  Nothing  contained  in  Ibis  sect  ion  shall  he  construed  as  to  relieve  the  licensee 
in  the  cases  set  forth  in  subsection  (a)  or  (b)  of  this  section  from  compliance 


621 


with  the  provisions  of  section  seven  [§  29-2B-7],  requiring  publication  of  notice 
of  intention  and  filing  of  proof  of  such  publication,  as  soon  after  the  granting  of 
permission  by  the  director  as  is  practicable.  In  lieu  thereof  the  licensee  may  fur- 
nish equivalent  transmission  of  notice  of  intention  by  radio  or  television,  and 
proof  thereof,  as  soon  after  the  granting  of  permission  by  the  director  as  is  prac- 
ticable. (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-9.  Records  and  reports 

(a)  Every  licensee  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of  all  operations  con- 
ducted by  him  pursuant  to  his  license  showing  the  method  employed,  the  type 
of  equipment  used,  the  times  and  places  of  operation  of  the  equipment,  the  name 
and  post-office  address  of  each  person  participating  or  assisting  in  the  operation 
other  than  the  licensee,  and  such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the 
commission,  and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  director  immediately  upon  the 
completion  of  each  operation. 

(b)  Each  licensee  shall  further  prepare  and  maintain  an  evaluation  statement 
for  each  operation  which  shall  include  a  report  as  to  estimated  precipitation, 
defining  the  gain  or  loss  occurring  from  nucleation  activities,  together  with 
supporting  data  therefor.  This  statement,  together  with  such  other  pertinent 
information  as  the  commission  may  require,  shall  be  sent  to  the  commission 
upon  completion  and  be  available  to  inspection  by  the  commission  or  director  at 
all  times  on  the  licensee's  premises. 

(c)  The  commission  shall  require  written  reports  concerning  each  operation 
conducted  by  a  licensee  under  this  article. 

(d)  All  information  on  an  operation  shall  be  submitted  to  the  commission 
before  any  information  on  such  operation  may  be  released  to  the  public. 

(e)  The  reports  and  records  in  the  custody  of  the  commission  shall  be  open  for 
public  examination  as  public  documents.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-10.  Research  projects ;  safety 

(a)  Research  work  within  the  province  of  this  statute  shall  be  permitted  only 
when  authorized  by  the  commission. 

(b)  Government  and  armed  forces  projects  within  the  province  of  this  statute 
must  meet  all  the  requirements  of  this  article. 

(c)  No  nucleating  agent  may  be  used  in  concentrations  dangerous  to  man  or 
causes  environmental  pollution  as  determined  by  the  state  department  of  health. 
(1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-11.  Enforcement  of  article 

In  order  to  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  article,  the  "West  Virginia  state  police 
shall,  on  request  of  the  commission,  assign  at  least  one  trooper  and  one  investi- 
gator to  an  area  where  unlawful  cloud  seeding  is  suspected.  If  such  police  request 
the  same,  the  commission  shall  assign  an  airplane  and  pilot.  Air  samples  shall 
be  taken  by  the  West  Virginia  air  pollution  control  commission  if  requested  by 
the  state  police  or  the  commission.  For  such  enforcement  purposes,  the  state 
department  of  health  shall  furnish  such  technical  services  as  the  commission  or 
director  may  request.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-12.  Suspension  or  revocation  of  license 

Any  license  may  be  revoked,  suspended  or  modified  if  the  commission  finds, 
after  due  notice  to  the  licensee  and  a  hearing  thereon,  that  the  licensee  has 
failed  or  refused  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  article.  The 
proceedings  herein  referred  to  shall  be  conducted  in  accordance  with  tbe  pro- 
visions of  article  one  [§  29A-1-1  et  seq.],  chapter  twenty-nine- A  of  the  Code  of 
West  Virginia,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  thirty-one,  as  amended,  known  as 
the  "West  Virginia  Administrative  Procedures  Act"  and  the  commission  shall 
have  all  the  powers  granted  therein.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-13.  Compensation  for  damage 

Any  license  who  causes  a  drought  as  determined  by  the  commission  shall  com- 
pensate farmers  for  damages.  Any  licensee  who  by  causing  heavy  downpours  or 
storms  which  cause  damage  to  lands  as  determined  by  the  commission  shall  com- 
pensate farmers  and  property  owners  for  such  damages.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-14.  Acts  not  authorized 

(a)  Nothing  contained  in  this  article  shall  authorize  any  person  to  carry  out 
a  cloud  seeding  operation  from  West  Virginia  to  seed  in  another  state  where  such 
cloud  seeding  is  prohibited. 

34-857—79  42 


622 


(b)  Nothing  contained  in  this  article  shall  be  construed  to  authorize  the  sup- 
pression-of  lightning.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

§  29-2B-15.  Offenses  and  penalties 

(a)  Any  airplane  pilot  who  flies  an  airplane  with  numbers  invisible  to  escape 
identification  under  this  article  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon 
conviction  thereof,  have  his  license  revoked  for  a  period  of  five  years. 

(b)  Any  airport  owner  or  operator  who  knowingly  boards  cloud  seeding  planes 
to  seed  clouds  or  who  operates  as  a  cloud  seeder  without  a  license  shall  be  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction  thereof,  have  his  airport  permit  revoked 
for  one  year  and  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of  not  more  than  five  hundred  dollars 
and  for  a  second  or  subsequent  offense,  he  shall  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of 
not  more  than  one  thousand  dollars. 

(c)  Any  person  knowingly  having  in  his  possession  without  registering  the 
same  with  the  commission  any  cloud  seeding  equipment  shall,  on  conviction 
thereof,  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of  ten  thousand  dollars. 

(d)  Any  person  who  makes  any  false  statement  to  secure  a  license  under  this 
article  shall,  on  conviction  thereof,  have  his  license  revoked  permanently. 

(e)  Any  person  who  violates  any  other  provision  of  this  article  shall  be  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  upon  conviction  thereof,  shall  be  fined  not  more  than 
one  thousand  dollars,  or  imprisoned  in  the  county  jail  not  more  than  one  year, 
or  both  fined  and  imprisoned.  (1969,  c.  18.) 

Wisconsin 

Wise.  Stat.  Ann.  §  195.40 

195. J/0  Reporting  operations  to  artificially  influence  precipitation 

(1)  For  the  purpose  of  determining  the  effect  of  operations  designed  to  in- 
fluence precipitation  of  atmospheric  moisture  by  artificial  means  it  is  hereby 
required  that  all  persons  engaged  in  such  operations  shall  comply  with  the  pro- 
visions of  this  section. 

(2)  Any  person  who  enters  into  any  contract  for  or  engages  in  any  activity  de- 
signed or  intended  to  affect  by  artificial  means  the  precipitation  of  atmospheric 
moisture  in  this  state  shall  register  each  proposed  operation  with  the  commission. 

(3)  The  registration  shall  set  forth  such  data  as  to  time,  place  and  method 
of  each  operation  as  the  commission  shall  reasonably  require  for  the  purpose  of 
making  a  scientific  evaluation  of  each  operation  and  its  effect  upon  the  public 
welfare. 

(4)  Each  registrant  shall  within  10  days  report  on  the  conduct  of  each  opera- 
tion and  shall  provide  such  data  as  the  commission  may  deem  necessary  in  the 
public  interest. 

(5)  Any  person  who  *  *  *  violates  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  section  shall 
forfeit  for  each  such  offense  a  sum  *  *  *  not  to  exceed  $250  together  with  the 
actual  costs  of  all  administrative  and  legal  action  necessary  to  collect  such  for- 
feiture. Such  forfeiture  shall  be  enforced  and  the  proceeds  disposed  of  as  pre- 
scribed in  s.  *  *  *  SO. 03.  Any  unregistered  operation  shall  be  subject  to  summary 
abatement  as  a  public  nuisance. 

Wyoming 

Wyo.  Stat.  1  §§  10-4—10-9;  9-267—9-276 

§  10-)/.  Aerial  spraying,  etc. — Annual  registration  required;  information  to  he 
shown. — On  the  first  Monday  in  May  of  each  year,  any  person  or  persons,  firm, 
partnership,  corporation,  association,  or  any  other  organization  engaged  in  the 
activity  or  business  of  aerial  spraying,  spreading  of  seeds,  weather-modification 
or  other  Chemicals,  dusting,  fertilizing,  baiting,  predator  control  or  insect  control 
of  any  area  of  Ibis  state,  and  all  aircraft  in  Wyoming  used  for  predator  control 
or  equipped  with  apparatus  for  distribution  of  sprays,  dnsts,  weather-modifica- 
tion  or  other  Chemicals,  seeds,  or  bait  shall  be  registered  annually  with  the 
Wyoming  aeronautics  commission  on  a  printed  form  or  forms  prescribed  by 
the  Wyoming  aeronautics  commission,  showing  the  name  of  the  firm  to  be 
registered,  the  name  and  address  of  the  owner,  owners,  and  manager  thereof, 
the  name  and  address  of  the  person  to  pilot  such  aircraft,  his  airman  rating, 
number  of  hours  flown,  with  airman  certificate  number,  the  make,  model  and 
type  of  aircraft  to  be  used  and  the  identification  number  assigned  to  the  aircraft 
and  type  of  spraying,  seed  or  chemical  spreading  or  dusting  rig  installed  on  the 
aircraft.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  142,  §  1 ;  1973,  eh.  57,  §  1.) 


623 


§  10-5.  Same — Unlawful  unless  registered. — It  is  unlawful  for  any  person,  firm, 
partnership,  corporation,  association,  organization  or  any  combination  thereof 
to  engage  in  the  activtiy  or  business  of  spraying,  spreading  of  seeds,  weather- 
moditication  or  other  chemicals,  dusting,  fertilizing,  baiting,  predator  control 
or  inspect  control  of  any  area  of  this  state  by  means  or  aircraft  unless  they 
are  registered  with  the  Wyoming  aeronautics  commission.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  142, 
§2;  1973,  ch.  57,  §  1.) 

§  10-6.  Same — Pilot,  operator  or  applicator  qualifications. — All  pilots,  operators, 
or  applicators  conducting  aerial  spraying,  spreading  of  seeds,  weather-modifica- 
tion or  other  chemicals,  dusting,  fertilizing,  predator  control  or  insect  control 
by  aircraft  must  have  a  minimum  of  500  solo  hours,  75  of  which  are  in  the 
same  type  aircraft  used  in  making  the  application  or  control,  and  25  hours 
actual  spraying  or  predator  control  experience.  A  pilot  may  satisfy  the  require- 
ment for  actual  spraying,  or  predator  control  experience  by  taking  five  hours  of 
dual  simulated  low  flying  from  a  qualified  instructor.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  142,  §3; 
1973,  ch.57,  §  1.) 

§  10-7.  Same — Shut-off  devices  for  aircraft  required. — That  each  aircraft  spray- 
ing, seed  or  chemical  spreading  or  dusting  rig  used  for  aerial  application  or  dis- 
semination of  sprays,  weather-modification  or  other  chemicals  and  dusts  shall 
be  satisfactorily  equipped  with  a  positive  shut-off  device  at  each  discharge 
nozzle  (manually  controlled  shut-off  valves,  spring  loaded  valves  or  Ball  checks 
acceptable)  which  will  absolutely  prevent  the  dissemination  of  material  on 
any  portion  of  the  terrain  over  which  flight  is  made  other  than  the  area  being 
treated  or  sprayed.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  142,  §  4.) 

§  10-8.  Same — Records  of  applications. — That  each  applicator  must  maintain 
a  record  of  each  application  of  weather-modification  or  other  chemicals,  fer- 
tilizer or  insecticides  which  records  may  be  inspected  by  officials  of  the  aero- 
nautics commission  on  demand.  Copies  of  said  records  shall  be  transmitted  to 
the  Wyoming  aeronautics  commission  within  ten  days  after  the  end  of  each 
calendar  month  during  period  of  operation  in  this  state  and  prior  to  departure 
from  the  State  of  Wyoming.  The  records  shall  contain  the  following  minimum 
information :  Name  and  address  of  contractee ;  property  description ;  variety 
of  crop  treated ;  stage  of  crop  growth ;  pests  or  weeds  to  be  controlled ;  brand 
and  type  of  chemical  used ;  type  of  solution  or  seeds  used ;  quantity  of  chemical 
used  per  acre ;  date  and  time  sprayed  or  treated ;  wind  velocity  and  direction. 
(Laws  1951,  ch.  142,  §5.) 

§10-9.  Same — Violation  of  §§  10-4  to  10-8. — Whoever  shall  violate  any  provi- 
sion of  this  act  [§§  10-4  to  10-9]  or  rules  and  regulations  thereunder  shall  be 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  upon  conviction  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  twenty- 
five  (  $25.00)  dollars  for  the  first  offense  and  not  less  than  fifty  ($50.00)  dollars 
for  each  subsequent  offense,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  not  exceeding- 
sixty  (60)  days,  or  both.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  142,  §  6.) 

Article  12 

Weather  Modification  Board 

§  9-267.  Sovereign  right  to  moisture  in  clouds  declared;  encouraging  weather 
experimentation;  proper  safeguards. — A.  It  is  hereby  declared  that  the  Start' 
of  Wyoming  claims  its  sovereign  right  to  the  use  for  its  residents  and  best  in- 
terests the  moisture  contained  in  the  clouds  and  atmosphere  within  its  sovereign 
state  boundaries. 

B.  It  is  hereby  declared  that  although  little  is  known  regarding  artificial  weath- 
er modification,  research  and  experimentation  shall  be  encouraged. 

C.  It  is  hereby  declared  that  although  the  ultimate  use  of  modification  methods 
is  speculative,  the  application  of  such  methods  should  have  proj)er  safeguards 
and  provide  sufficient  data  to  protect  life,  property,  and  public  interest.  (Laws 
1951,  ch.  131,  §  1. ) 

§  9-268.  Board  created;  designation ;  composition;  compensation ;  expenses. — 
There  is  hereby  created  a  board,  to  be  known  as  the  state  weather  modification 
board.  The  members  of  the  board  shall  consist  of  the  state  engineer,  the  com- 
missioner of  agriculture,  and  the  president  of  the  University  of  Wyoming  or 
their  designated  representatives.  The  members  shall  serve  on  the  board  without 
pay  but  shall  be  entitled  to  charge  actual  expenses  incurred  therewith  to  the 
department  by  which  they  are  primarily  einnloved.  (Laws  1951.  eh.  131.  §2.) 

§  9-269.  Function  of  board;  "weather  modification"  defined. — The  primary  func- 


624 


tion  of  ,the  board  is  to  procure,  compile,  and  evaluate  information  relative  to 
weather  modification  experiments  and  activities  within  the  state  boundaries. 
The  term  "weather  modification"  means  changing,  or  controlling  any  of  the 
weather  phenomena  by  chemical,  mechanical,  or  physical  methods.  (Laws  1951, 
ch.  131,  §3.) 

§  9-270.  Weather  modification  permit — Required  to  engage  in  modification  ac- 
tivities; issuance;  form. — It  shall  be  unlawful  for  anyone  to  engage  in  weather 
modification  activities  except  under  and  in  accordance  with  a  permit  issued  by 
the  state  engineer.  The  state  engineer  may  issue  such  permit  only  upon  the  rec- 
ommenation  of  the  weather  modification  board  and  in  such  form  as  prescribed 
by  the  board.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  131,  §  4.) 

§  9-211.  Same — Separate  permit  required  for  each  experiment  or  activity; 
permits  issued  for  one  year;  revocation;  fees,  qualifications  of  permittee;  author- 
ity to  promulgate  rules  and  regulations. — A  separate  permit  shall  be  issued  for 
each  experiment  or  activity.  Permits  shall  be  revocable  by  the  state  engineer  upon 
recommendation  of  the  board,  in  accordance  with  such  procedures  as  the  board 
shall  establish.  Permits  are  to  be  issued  for  one  year  from  October  1  of  one  year 
to  September  30  of  the  following  year.  A  fee  of  $25  shall  be  charged  for  each  permit 
issued  or  renewed.  Fees  received  by  the  board  shall  be  deposited  with  the  state 
treasurer  to  be  placed  into  the  general  fund.  A  permit  shall  be  issued  only  to  a 
person,  or  persons,  who  can  demonstrate  to  the  board's  satisfaction  that  he  has 
or  they  have  adequate  qualifications  in  the  atmospheric  sciences.  To  justify  is- 
suance of  a  permit,  the  state  weather  modification  board  is  hereby  granted  rea- 
sonable authority  to  promulgate  the  rules  and  regulations  necessary  to  effectuate 
the  purposes  of  the  Wvoming  weather  modification  laws.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  131, 
§  5 :  1965,  ch.  66,  §  1 ;  1971,  ch.  104,  §  1 ;  1973.  ch.  245,  §  3. 

§  9-212.  Same — Registration  certificate  to  be  issued;  fee. — Prior  to  the  issuance 
of  any  permit  the  board  shall  have  issued  a  registration  certificate  to  the  person 
or  persons  requesting  such  permit.  A  registration  certificate  shall  be  issued  only 
after  the  board  has  considered  and  approved  the  qualifications  and  responsibility 
of  the  person  or  persons  requesting  a  certificate.  A  registration  fee  of  twenty-five 
dollars  ($25.00)  per  calendar  year  shall  be  charged  for  each  registration  certifi- 
cate so  issued.  Registration  fees  so  received  by  the  board  may  be  used  by  the 
board  in  paying  part  or  all  of  its  administrative  expenses.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  131, 
§6.) 

§  9-21 '3.  Same — Written  report  of  experiments  required. — The  board  shall  be 
required  to  demand  and  receive  a  written  report,  in  such  manner  as  it  shall  pro- 
vide, covering  each  separate  experiment  or  activity  for  which  a  permit  is  issued. 
(Laws  1951.  ch.  131.  §  7.) 

§  9-21  Jf.  Same — Failure  to  obtain  permit. — Any  person,  persons,  corporation, 
institution,  or  group  engaging  in  a  weather  modification  experiment  without  a 
permit  shall  be  guilty  of  a  felony  and  upon  conviction  subject  to  a  fine  not  to 
exceed  one-thousand  dollars  ($1,000.00)  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  penitentiary 
for  not  less  than  one  nor  more  than  five  years.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  131,  §  10:  19.15. 
ch.  166.  §  1.) 

§  9-215.  Authority  to  receive  and  accept  funds. — Said  board  is  hereby  author- 
ized and  empowered  to  receive  and  accept  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  state  any 
and  all  funds  which  may  be  offered  or  become  available,  from  federal  grants  or 
appropriations,  private  gifts,  donations  or  bequests,  or  any  other  source,  and  to 
expend  such  funds  for  the  expenses  of  administering  this  act  [§§  9-267  to  9-276], 
and  for  the  encouragement  of  experimentation  in  weather  modification  by  the 
"Tniversity  of  Wyoming  or  any  other  appropriate  state  or  public  asrency.  either 
by  direct  grant,  by  contract,  or  other  co-operative  means.  (Laws  1951,  ch.  131, 
§8.) 

§9-216.  Act  construed;  rights,  duties  and  liabilities  unchanged. — Nothinsr  in 
this  act  T§§  9-267  to  9-276]  shall  be  construed  to  impose  or  accept  any  liability  or 
responsibilily  on  the  part  of  the  State,  the  board,  or  any  state  officials  or  "em- 
ployees, for  any  weather-modification  activities  of  any  private  person  or  group, 
nor  to  affect  in  any  way  any  contractual,  tortious,  or  other  lesral  rights,  duties 
or  liabilities  between  any  private  persons  or  groups.  (Laws  1951,  oh.  131.  §9.) 

Effective  date.— Section  11,  ch  131.  Laws  1951,  makes  the  act  effective  from 
and  after  passage.  Approved  February  19, 1951. 


Appendix  E 


List  of  State  Contacts  for  Further  Information  on  Weather 
Modification  Activities  Within  the  States  *• 2 

Commissioner,  Department  of  Agriculture  and  Industries,  State  Capitol,  Mont- 
gomery, Ala.  36104. 

Commissioner,  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  Pouch  M,  Juneau,  Alaska  99811. 

Briggs,  Philip  C,  Chief  Hydrologist  Arizona  Water  Commission  222  N.  Central, 
Suite  800,  Phoenix,  Ariz.  85004. 

Division  of  Soil  and  Water  Resources,  Department  of  Commerce,  1501  N.  Uni- 
versity Avenue,  Suite  364,  Little  Rock,  Ark.  72207. 

Finlayson,  Donald  J..  Department  of  Water  Resources,  P.O.  Box  16008S  Sac- 
ramento, Calif.  95816. 

Sherman,  Harris,  Executive  Director,  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  1313 
Sherman  Street,  Room  718,  Denver,  Colo.  80203. 

Commissioner  Department  of  Agriculture  and  Natural  Resources,  State  Office 
Building,  Hartford,  Conn.  06115. 

Olney,  Austin  P.,  Secretary,  Department  of  Natural  Resources  and  Environmen- 
tal Control.  Edward  Tatnall  Building,  Dover.  Del.  19901. 

Chief,  Bureau  of  Water  Resource  Management,  Montgomery  Building,  2562 
Executive  Center  Circle.  East,  Tallahassee,  Fla.  32301. 

Rhinehart,  John,  Office  of  Planning  and  Budget,  270  Washington  St.,  S.W., 
Atlanta,  Ga.  30334. 

Governor,  Executive  Chambers,  State  Capitol,  Honolulu,  Hawaii  96813. 

Allred,  Stephen,  Department  of  Water  Resources,  373  W.  Franklin  Street,  Boise, 
Idaho  83720. 

Changnon,  Stanley  A.,  Jr.,  Head,  Atmospheric  Sciences  Section,  Illinois  State 
Water  Survey,  Box  232,  Urbana  111.  61801. 

Schaal  Lawrence,  State  Climatologist,  Poultry  Science  Building,  Purdue  Uni- 
versity, West  Lafayette,  Ind.  47907. 

Waite,  Paul.  Iowa  Weather  Service,  Room  10,  Terminal  Building,  Municipal  Air- 
port, Des  Moines,  Iowa  50321. 

Kostecki,  Don,  Kansas  Water  Resource  Board,  Suite  303,  503  Kansas,  Topeka, 
Kan.  66603. 

Kimmel,  Michael  J.,  Office  of  Planning  and  Research,  Department  of  Natural 
Resources  and  Environment,  Capitol  Plaza  Tower,  6th  Floor,  Frankfort,  Ky. 
40601. 

Aguillard,  Roy,  Louisiana  State  Department  of  Public  Works,  Box  44155,  Capitol 

Station,  Baton  Rouge,  La.  70804. 
Anderson,  Burton  R.,  Water  Resource  Planner,  State  Planning  Office,  184  State 

Street,  Augusta,  Me.  04333. 
Hance,  Young  D.,  Secretary,  Department  of  Agriculture,  Parole  Plaza  Office 

Building,  Annapolis,  Md.  21401. 
McLoughlin,  Thomas  F.,  Director,  Division  of  Administrative  Services,  Executive 

Office  of  Environmental  Affairs,  100  Cambridge  Street,  Boston,  Mass.  02202. 
Nurnberger,  Fred  V.,  Department  of  Agriculture/Weather  Services,  240  Stephen 

S.  Nisbet  Building,  1407  S.  Harrison  Road,  East  Lansing,  Mich.  48823. 
Young,  Randall  D.,  Senior  Management  Analyst  Planning,  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, 557  State  Office  Building,  St.  Paul,  Minn.  55337. 
Pepper,  Jack  W..  Water  Engineer,  Board  of  Water  Commissioners,  416  N.  State 

Street.  Jackson,  Miss.  39201. 
Ashford,  Carolyn,  Director,  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  Box  176,  1014 

Madison  Street,  Jefferson  City,  Mo.  65101. 

1  Based  on  information  received  from  Conrad  G.  Keyes,  Jr.,  Executive  Director  of  the 
North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council ;  information  was  corrected  as  of 
January  30,  1978. 

2  Listed  alphabetically  by  State. 

(625) 


626 


Moy,  Richard,  Weather  Modification  Program  Manager,  Department  of  Natural 
Resources  and  Conservation,  Natural  Resources  Building,  32  South  Ewing, 
Helena,  Mont.  59601. 

Kreuscher,  Glenn  W.,  Director,  Department  of  Agriculture,  P.O.  Box  4844,  Lin- 
coln, Nebr.  68509. 

Warblirton,  Joseph  A.,  Desert  Research  Institute,  University  of  Nevada,  Stead 
Campus,  Reno,  Nev.  89507. 

Gilman,  George,  Commissioner,  Department  of  Resource  and  Economic  Develop- 
ment. State  House  Annex,  Concord,  N.H.  03301. 

Chummey,  Richard,  Director,  Division  of  Rural  Resources,  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, P.O.  Box  1888,  Trenton,  N.J.  0S625. 

Holmes,  Charles,  Secretary,  New  Mexico  Weather  Control  and  Climate  Modifica- 
tion Commission,  New  Mexico  Institute  of  Mining  and  Technology,  Socorro, 
N.  Mex.  87801. 

Berle,  Peter  A.,  Commissioner,  Department  of  Environmental  Conservation,  50 

Wolf  Road,  Albany,  N.Y.  12233. 
Secretarv,  Department  of  Natural  and  Economic  Resources,  P.O.  Box  27687, 

Raleigh,  N.C.  27611. 

Rose.  R.  Lynn,  Executive  Director,  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board, 
P.O.  Box  1833,  Bismarck,  N.Dak.  58505. 

Division  of  Water,  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  Fountain  Square,  Colum- 
bus, Ohio  43224. 

Oklahoma  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Committee,  Oklahoma  Water  Resources 
Board,  Jim  Thorpe  Building,  5th  Floor,  Oklahoma  City,  OkJa.  73105. 

Glatt,  Jay,  Assistant  Director,  Department  of  Agriculture,  210  Agriculture  Build- 
ing, Salem,  Oreg.  97310. 

Wertz,  Fred,  Research  Analyst,  Pennsylvania  Department  of  Agriculture,  2301 
Cameron  Street,  Harrisburg,  Pa.  17120. 

Russ.  Robert  B.,  Water  Resources  Board,  Box  2772,  Providence.  R.I.  02907. 

Guess,  Clair  P.,  Jr.,  Executive  Director,  Water  Resources  Commission,  Box  4515, 
3838  Forest  Drive,  Columbia,  S.C.  29204. 

Butler.  Yern  W.,  Department  of  Natural  Resources  Development,  Joe  Foss  Office 
Building,  Pierre,  S.Dak.  57501. 

Division  of  Water  Resources,  Tennessee  Department  of  Conservation,  6213  Char- 
lotte Avenue,  Nashville,  Tenn.  37209. 

Carr,  John  T.,  Director,  Weather  Modification  and  Technology  Division,  Texas 
1  >epartment  of  Water  Resources.  Box  13087,  Austin,  Tex.  78711. 

Summers,  Paul  C,  Cloud  Seeding  Program  Coordinator,  Division  of  Water 
Resources,  435  State  Capitol  Building,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84114. 

Department  of  Water  Resources,  Environmental  Conservation  Agency,  5  Court 
Street,  Montpelier,  Vt.  05602. 

State  Air  Pollution  Control  Board,  Room  1106,  Ninth  Street  Office  Building,  Rich- 
mond. Va.  23219. 

Goodman,  Duane,  Department  of  Ecology,  335  General  Administration  Building, 

Olympia,  Wash.  98504. 
Richards,  William  E.,  Executive  Director,  West  Virginia  Aeronomy  Commission, 

Kanawha  Airport,  Charleston,  W.Va.  25311. 
Conrad,  Marlin  S.,  Plant  Industry  Division,  Department  of  Agriculture,  Trades 

and  Consumer  Protection,  801  W.  Badger  Road,  Madison,  Wis.  53713. 
Christopulos,  George  L.,  State  Engineers  OflSce.  Barrett  Building,  Second  Floor, 

Cheyenne,  Wyo.  82002. 


Appendix  F 


Agreement  on  Exchange  of  Information  on  Weather  Modification 
Between  the  United  States  of  America  and  Canada 

Treaties  and  Other  International  Acts  Series  8056 

Weather  Modification — Exchange  of  Information 

Agreement  Between  the 

United  States  of  America  and  Canada 
Signed  at  Washington  March  26, 1975. 

note  by  the  department  of  state 

Pursuant  to  Public  Law  89-497,  approved  July  8,  1966  (80  Stat. 
271;  1U.S.C.  113)  — 

The  Treaties  and  Other  International  Acts  Series  issued  under  the 
authority  of  the  Secretary  of  State  shall  be  competent  evidence  of 
the  treaties,  international  agreements  other  than  treaties,  and 
proclamations  by  the  President  of  such  treaties  and  international 
agreements  other  than  treaties,  as  the  case  may  be,  therein  con- 
tained, in  all  the  courts  of  law  and  equity  and  of  maritime  jurisdic- 
tion, and  in  all  the  tribunals  and  public  offices  of  the  United  States, 
and  of  the  several  States,  without  any  further  proof  or  authentica- 
tion thereof. 

Canada 

Weather  Modification  :  Exchange  of  Information 

Agreement  signed  at  Washington  March  26,  1975  ;  entered  into  force  March  26, 
1975. 

AGREEMENT  BETWEEN  THE  UNITED   STATES   OF  AMERICA  AND  CANADA  RELATING  TO 
THE  EXCHANGE  OF  INFORMATION  ON  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  of  America  and  the  Government  of 
Canada, 

Aware,  because  of  their  geographic  proximity,  that  the  effects  of  weather 
modification  activities  carried  out  by  either  Party  or  its  nationals  may  affect 
the  territory  of  the  other  ; 

Noting  the  diversity  of  weather  modification  activities  in  both  the  United  States 
and  Canada  by  private  parties,  by  State  and  Provincial  authorities,  and  by  the 
Federal  Governments ; 

Believing  that  the  existing  state  of  knowledge  warrants  the  expectation  of 
further  development  over  a  period  of  time  in  the  science  and  technology  of 
weather  modification ; 

Taking  into  particular  consideration  the  special  traditions  of  prior  notification 
and  consultation  and  the  close  cooperation  that  have  historically  characterized 
their  relations ; 

Believing  that  a  prompt  exchange  of  pertinent  information  regarding  the 
nature  and  extent  of  weather  modification  activities  of  mutual  interest  may 
facilitate  the  development  of  the  technology  of  weather  modification  for  their 
mutual  benefit ; 

Recognizing  the  desirability  of  the  development  of  international  law  relating 
to  weather  modification  activities  having  transboundary  effects ; 
Have  agreed  as  follows  : 

Article  I 

As  used  in  this  Agreement : 

(a)  "Weather  modification  activities",  means  activities  performed  with  the 

(627) 


628 


intention  of  producing  artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics 
of  the  atmosphere ; 

(b)  "Weather  modification  activities  of  mutual  interest"  means  weather 
modification  activities  carried  out  in  or  over  the  territory  of  a  Party  within  200 
miles  of  the  international  boundary ;  or  such  activities  wherever  conducted, 
which,  in  the  judgment  of  a  Party,  may  significantly  affect  the  composition,  be- 
havior, or  dynamics  of  the  atmosphere  over  the  territory  of  the  other  Party ; 

(c)  "Responsible  agencies"  means  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Ad- 
ministration of  the  United  States  and  the  Atmospheric  Environment  Service  of 
Canada,  or  such  other  agencies  as  the  Parties  may  designate ; 

(d)  "Reporting  requirements"  means  the  requirements  established  by  the 
domestic  laws  or  regulations  of  the  Parties  for  reporting  to  the  responsible 
agencies  information  relating  to  weather  modification  activities  by  persons  or 
entities  engaged  in  weather  modification. 

Article  II 

(1)  Information  relating  to  weather  modification  activities  of  mutual  interest 
acquired  by  a  responsible  agency  through  its  reporting  requirements  or  other- 
wise, shall  be  transmitted  as  soon  as  practicable  to  the  responsible  agency  of  the 
other  Party.  Whenever  possible,  this  information  shall  be  transmitted  prior  to 
the  commencement  of  such  activities.  It  is  anticipated  that  such  information  will 
be  transmitted  within  five  working  days  of  its  receipt  by  a  responsible  agency. 

(2)  Information  to  be  provided  by  the  responsible  agencies  shall  include  copies 
of  relevant  reports  received  through  the  reporting  procedures  after  the  effective 
date  of  this  Agreement,  and  such  other  information  and  interpretation  as  the 
responsible  agency  might  consider  appropriate. 

(3)  Nothing  herein  shall  be  construed  to  require  transmission  to  the  other 
responsible  agency  of  information,  the  disclosure  of  which  is  prohibited  by  law, 
or  of  information  which,  in  the  judgment  of  the  responsible  agency,  is  proprietary 
information. 

Article  III 

The  responsible  agencies  shall  consult  with  a  view  to  developing  compatible 
reporting  formats,  and  to  improving  procedures  for  the  exchange  of  information. 

Article  IV 

In  addition  to  the  exchange  of  information  pursuant  to  Article  II  of  this  Agree- 
ment, each  Party  agrees  to  notify  and  to  fully  inform  the  other  concerning  any 
weather  modification  activities  of  mutual  interest  conducted  by  it  prior  to  the 
commencement  of  such  activities.  Every  effort  shall  be  made  to  provide  such  no- 
tice as  far  in  advance  of  such  activities  as  may  be  possible,  bearing  in  mind  the 
provisions  of  Article  V  of  this  Agreement. 

Article  V 

The  Parties  agree  to  consult,  at  the  request  of  either  Party,  regarding  particu- 
lar weather  modification  activities  of  mutual  interest.  Such  consultations  shall 
be  initiated  promptly  on  the  request  for  a  Party,  and  in  cases  of  urgency  may  be 
undertaken  through  telephonic  or  other  rapid  means  of  communications.  Consul- 
tations shall  be  carried  out  in  light  of  the  Parties'  laws,  regulations,  and  adminis- 
trative practices  regarding  weather  modification. 

Article  VI 

The  Parties  recognize  that  extreme  emergencies,  such  as  forest  fires,  may 
require  immediate  commencement  by  one  of  them  of  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities of  mutual  interest  notwithstanding  the  lack  of  sufficient  time  for  prior 
notification  pursuant  to  Article  IV,  or  for  consultation  pursuant  to  Article  V.  In 
such  cases,  the  Party  commencing  such  activities  shall  notify  and  fully  inform 
the  other  Party  as  soon  as  practicable,  and  shall  promptly  enter  into  consulta- 
tions at  the  request  of  the  other  Party. 

Article  VII 

Nothing  herein  relates  to  or  shall  be  construed  to  affect  the  question  of  re- 
sponsibility or  liability  for  weather  modification  activities,  or  to  imply  the 
existence  of  any  generally  applicable  rule  of  international  law. 


629 


Article  VIII 

Each  Party  shall  conduct  an  annual  review  of  this  Agreement  while  it  remains 
in  force,  and  shall  inform  the  other  of  its  views  regarding  the  Agreement's  opera- 
tion and  effectiveness  and  the  desirability  of  its  amendment  to  reflect  the  evolu- 
tion of  the  science  and  technology  of  weather  modification  and  of  international 
law.  The  Parties  shall  meet  periodically,  by  mutual  agreement,  or  at  the  request 
of  either,  to  review  the  implementation  of  this  Agreement  or  to  consider  other 
issues  related  to  weather  modification. 

Article  IX 

This  Agreement  shall  enter  into  force  upon  signature.  It  may  be  amended  by 
mutual  agreement  of  the  Parties  and  may  be  terminated  by  either  Party  upon 
six  months  written  notice  to  the  other  Party. 


630 


o  o 


5,     ^         t^ro-^-  (u 


OT3 

c5 


CO  <D  CO 
05  C"?  C 


2  « 


2  wjq  a> 


o  co 

co  - 
■f  c  f° 


<  o 


O  =  i- 
too  Q. 


E -I 


03  CO 

js  a> 
E  5. 


Q 


=  2£ 

D-  Q.  o 


.2  aT—  to 


•2<d 
'q.2  >-; 


o  • 

cj  °6 


 CO  CJ  i— 1  ■ 


id  E 

<1>  co  ^,.^1 


I  ^  c  t — 


'  (£>  co 
;  co  cd 


O  o 


■J  CPCNJ 

•  <o<T>      o*;  cro 
oo2.«s=  3  ^  - 


co  co.  Lr  °o 

<JJ  O  0)Jo 

<  o  - 


Q. 

ra  y  bj" 


^™  E£  -3  n  ™-2  8^ 
c  ^^E^3  ^  ~  « 

•jt-Q-ooc^cT.  3>  </)C0<O 


■S    5_  »>      E  .8  gS» 

3     m  ra  c     *r  -£=  a>  co     _  >>  . 

I3*3Kh£|]|B| 

_l  UJ  «t 


631 


-g  ES-I    ©"3 -8 

*—'  Q._c:  o  =  to  o 
ecnj-o  2  oo  cr  c  o 

E.E  «E£°! 


■  o  to  °  2        ^  2 

*        —  TO  —  DC  <b  a.  OC  03  —  — 


o 

O  £X3  _ 

■g  .2  =  03  0-5  ro  O  ■ 


«2  . 

»>•»  E 

=  "S  TO 

a,'a>t? 


c  gfc  55-  E  |  oi 
-co*-  E-o_° 


E  -a-Ke 
•  "5  o 


,cr> 
—  o  E 


a>  . 

4)  «  0) 
5  >•  TO  I 

< 


p-o 


£  Em 


a)  >  on 
£TOQ-lm      TO  « 

O.S2  o  ga=.Si  5  S-O  - 


3 

T3  03 

co 

-  E 

03  o 

c  —  —         =  £  . 

c  *£  >  E  OQ  .0 
=.So«  o_o 


0  <  o 


«3- 

a>0 


^  0=--TO 

-a  as  <u  ct>  £=  5? 
o  — 


=  TOg  » 

d</>  **ja 
i  8  -g, E 

:  -  03.  . 


0on' 

i&s 

o*  <a  >" 

C  C  03 

0  E  = 

=>,  03  • 


£to 


JL  m  "o 


.CM 


c/>  tj 


<J  5^  -o  E"a 
_    £:  .     ro  E  o  ' 


03  COO 

00  E^4 


=  5  E^oJ  to  £ 

TO-S.nj^cTix:'-*; 
■5  o  GO  >  00  ro<.£ 
<  ^ 


S  g  g  S  §^  _-S-S'5.£ 

3  >-  C-O  "=*"C  Q.°  O  o  u  Q.  f~~ 


TO  O  Q_ 


•TS  TO  _ 

5£.c3=^-ct3 


0>     -TD  0 

E-S_^2: 


O 

a."  o~ 


C  —  QQ  CO 


{J  =  -  CVI 
c  O  1_  CNJ 

-coq  Eos 

^SSto-'0-  I 
.E  —  "S  =  S.  "2 

>  <=>  0-  00  00  o 


O  O 
03 


632 


ESS 


Daotn>1  


re  52 


0.2J 

  - 

re  -o 


a>  <u  o 

a!? 

=  2  g. 
Q-  o.  o 


5  c 
■a  3 

uS§3 

CD  " 


en  . 
c  —as 


"2 
-  o 


■  re  » 
:5z 


.2  05 


S  ro  re  rt  «  I 


o  c 


>-  re 
aj  — 


4  =■ 
oo 
5 


^<-o  re£ 
a>_-     5      oi    .  J= 

o1^"^  ere  re  gf  =  re-5 


So 


"S  s 


c  re  £= 

1^  t/>  re  —  „.- 
_  re  o  evi  S» 
L  J  c  D  E 

E  ^  a.  oo 


S3 


g*  d 


ceo  3" 

m  o  aj 
=  g-.se  re 
re  *- 


«  J.Ed 
'o  2rm 


o  a> 
^  o 
vt  si 
■-•-„- 

sj1-  . 

re^EE 

co  o  <g  g 


o 

o 

re  aTen- 
°- 

?  £in. 


O  E  «-S  gj^oo 
<~3.  £ 

o-o  g 


<>-<<• 

5 


.  — 1  CD 


re£- 

5^ 

_  (-o 

n 

c  co 

ntir 
3  0 

2^ 

w  o 

O  r~~ 

£  e 
o  2 

ion 

i3 

C  CO 


.  o  .  >  >  i 
QQcvJ5-  £ 
'  o  e  o  ' 
>    rro  o  *= ' 

"°«>  m  —  ' 


O  -O 


co 


•E^^o- 

—  CM  -gj 

O"£<£>o  re 
S —  -coo 

ifigi 

00 


633 


o  E 


C  2? 

.=  — - 
< 


E  o  ,  ~  3*  ^  oi 
3-z  ~  c  Q.5  o  a- 


if; 

seS 

£0=  — 


O  T3  w 

<3 


<<°. 


CD  . 
— '  CO 


<  £ 
III 


-D  TO 

93 


tV,  o  o. 

O  SCD 


-E  cx.-«.fc:^ 


■go  _ro 

O  ro     o  tirf"* 

_  03 


o  b:, 
o  o, 


5  •"£"  J 


o  < 

o 


n  CT)  lD 

a>  — ,  — ■ 
o  - 
- 

,.  cj<r-^ 
o 


as 

o 
a. 

QO 
< 

OO 
< 

;red  hopper 
id  blower- 

3anegen- 
rators. 

erators  (15 
imotely  con- 
olled,  20 
lanual). 

c  <ZSs  t 

"O 

<u 
o 

tS 

.o 

c  5> 

IS  C 

■o 
c 
=j 

o 
■a 

>_  a> 

<£  Q. 

< 

o 
<5 

o 

o 

o 

o" 
o 

o 

o 

o 

ro 

o 

Seattle-Tacoma 
Airport,  Wash. 

Southwest  Utah. 

Southeast  San 
Juan  Moun- 
tains, Colo. 

id 

Old 

en 

1974,  ti 
24, 19/ 

:t.  1, 
Mar. 

^  EL 

o  < 
03 

o 

o 

O 

2 

c  i22-o'  »  S 

t  QJ     _  03  —  L. 

ro  ro 
5  o= 


S  o2 
£cn  . 


O  o  r^. 
tJ~z  ccr> 

E=  o  pen  >, 
ro  03  £~  ro 


E§< 


1  g< 

03 -O 


5  .±  ._  t 

i_  <c  <a;  to  to 


E.     °-_r  -E^  ° 

m.y »-  aj      =  <r    -o  —  ro  r? 

01-1-      oo     pr^QOcn  c:ll-J2 

E<!=ou2--E   .<   r  |-o» 

O    ,  IijIq  £  oo-o-'i  ,3  ^  -! 

"MEjiSo.E.ES 

3lu<c>cq5'5S  5q§ 


S°  2 

S-<cn 


<  r 

If  s 

ro<°S 


oJ"  -  tn 
yCQ_ro 

-  ro  E  Si°-o 


CXI 


5oo 

5  - 


ran,  i_  CJ 
o  ro  e-^jr  g 

O  o 
Q-  00 


,o5 


■o  o" 

:  g 

C  o 
ro  Q-cr> 
u-ooco 


E  03rK 
^  S  03  0-  ro 


CD 


:  C  n  03  ■ 

'(jQU 

--E 


O  ilf)        03     -  "CO 
O  m 

O-Sf-      w      '  ro  — 

a3!-iroroo!- 
^     ^     Eo°°E-  -~ 
< o  to. «.2  ' 

x:  o  =  "~ 
j-  ro 

5-^ 


O   Q.  - 

250 

03 
< 


CJlO  - 
^  X  O 


CO) 
o  — 1 

<_)  r-l 

00  LD 


c:  cn 
old 
00 


=  0 


=  0 

o  ^ 


=  -2 

O-D 


CM  C  f 

Ol —  O  « 

L^2 

S  o 


634 


2  gg 


o>  j= 

CO  00/ 


go- 
al 


•  to 


a.  a> 
o  °a 

CL. 


c  o 
ol 


E  5  3=75  5 


2  <= 
73  o 


■t2o 


CO  id 


>«3  SO 
O 

CTJ  _ 
*~ '  IT) 


co 

CO  to 


So 


CO 

O  <  C 

•  —  aj  co  <g 

lOZU.  g.  Q> 
CO 


LT5  - 

cr>  co 


O  — 


2««' 


1-1  a. 


o  ■ 
To 


2o 


ca^        ..2  coai 


_  r-      oo  r-~. 
o"     —  5>  in  • 

«    8  »* 


5Sl.iS< 


_h-o  =  . 

gf2i 

.±2 »—  "S  oo 

a 

en  _ 


m 
^00 


o>  co  Sj£f"^ 
co  2  2  ct.  *J 

0J  O  E  •— '  Q. 


.-  =,  £  CO  CO      ^  ■£ 

cj^  c      Q_  5  coo  CD 


cd  o"5  b| 

C  2"  "  CO 


■—  c  o.  co 
0  _^  <r  ^ 


S  CO  O.CD  =3 
=  O 

—  CO 


o  So 


^j-^-<  CD  if  - 
i/>0Q  ^-    '  CD  oO  — 


E  Q5  00.2-  -o>  p     •=  cn  ojcq  c 


to  CD  Q_  fc  CNJ 


-a  E 


r_CO*-   =  CD_o_ 

£^  =  =  0  <d "s^;  j 

O  >       ^  O  75  >IDQ 


a  too 
5o  . 


_ 'l3q7B  | 
co  o  o  cs-t 

O  CD0-  00; 


±:  "  3  o   .        i  0  « 

«2HOy5  ^2      7d  00 

Q  O 


— -°  S° 

0J  c  nn 
E  CD  m  C1- 


635 


1  1 ki  1 1 


Q  Q  q  00 


118 


S  o  g 

3« I"*  «  . 

>-  o  e  ro  *=  r-. 
_a>  u  _  S:  is  — - 
o 


E  . 


•J  I    .  ^ 

"    4E   .  ir.-co     S   •<=  . 
£=-.E  Q-fetS  S  "  «     rS  »  =  ' 


:2'S=<S2 


111 
2.9  9- 


ir  xJ2 

O20O 


Eg 


x 

o  _ 

3" 


■  o  — 0 

d>j°:.i  ««fes 


00 

o>  .  sz  cj  2  — 
o>  x  a>  "j;  Q  — 

o 


fS||s-||l^  1 
£iHe£  siSs 

;  oq-Q-o_2  > 

:  a-  ^= 


c  r-». 


—  00  a 


2  000  ^ 


:  e  e*=- 


636 


2=  o 

re  <2 


o  -a 

<5 


5  S  2  3    ^  ,  S 

I  as  '  3s  i  •  mX:  ® 
5«o  o  «i  s  ""o  o  a>i 


3  "E 


3  o  as 
a.  e. 


c  S 


o 
O 


5 


=  £5 
re  t. 
a>  o 


o  re 
O  Q 


St 

£  5 


5 


5?T3 

!"2  £ 


E  o    -2  ^ff    're  c-  ^ 00 

"rea5-SS?     j2  re  UJ  ^^Si 

—  tv. 


co  i—  a)  oo  >—  i 
re  a>win  re  ^m^-  ' 

5          C^^.E          j£USr-l  o 

c're.2<T>irT  c'S.eoi^r13, 


=   C   00  0>«TH 

o  j=_  c-^cr> 

"re  £  '«5.2-Hbi 

~  ro      to  o>5in' 

'3  c  =  >-  =J  of 
qj  a)  re  0. — 1  4-  — • 


-co   .        £-o,2   -S2~  ■  po  £  Q 


2  o  000 
00^ 


is.sir! 


a>  o  ?r£i5«~o  "a  ^=  .2-  _,- 


loco"1 
!  E  Ess. 


5° 


>0  re 

2    r-  Q 


E5  £  re 

<  2  o<z 
>  c:  ts 


™  T3  (U  r?  °> 


J:  a>.J  ,  a>  00 

aOZ0-  -T  0) 

>•  r-  • •  —  r-~  re  XJ  e 

=  P  —  goo  c  c  =1 

^  I  -re 

£  5  2lo  •  2"§  =  • 

f  ■§  aSz  2;<^Z 


utt:  °z 
a> 

to  "9  2 


637 


E 

OS 


a,  o 
< 


05  11 

re -2 
—  re 


«3  O 

"*?  2 


o  00 

o 
re  _ 


jQ  ^ 


o 

o 

o 

o 

ID 
CSI 

o 

co 

to' 

LT> 
OO 

-central 
jlaware. 

ot  County, 

ich. 

jr 

o 

S 

Si 

re 
LU 

2S 
o 

O  LO 

2  in 

lune  1,  1975, 
Aug.  31,  19; 

une  15,  197 
Aug.  31,  1 

....do..... 

E  °P2i 


.S«- 
.2  3* 


1  o  <^> 


32< 


c  re^., 


«  03 

E=  . 


c/5  >  Si 

oaCC  re 


10 


E  ScoC- 

c  o  =3  0cri 
°ro  ■** 


TO  •— '  iD 
03  ' 


>  <£  CO 


31  >W 


03  aj  CTJ 

£.3  o° 
C3 


r  E 

e-Ere 

03  "5  - 
£  o  E  Si  • 
§■«"  >.5S' 
—  ^  £ 

C3  — >  «g  °-CNi 


ijUlflll 


c  re  5 
S  »  g 


52. 


<  z: 


core  E§5«S»w|Stf! 


"Oro 


:2  £  re  ci. 

.•■SOW. 


<  . 

O  LO 
2<0 


5  P  ™ 


5 


g-|i2 


'J2  re 


x  cr> 
on 


"E  »f 


^  o        ^-  o 


34-S57— 79- 


-43 


638 


C3.CsJCJ.-h  1 

co  o  o  © 


51 


05  o  l 
CD   >s  I 


o-o 
c5 


'< 


o5 


^_  to  *-* 
°  to^ 
"Coo 


E  -  TO 

.£<< 


O 

  to 


o  o  ro 
a.  a.  i- 
!=  o  9? 


O  ID 

-CD 
CO  ~i 

r>-  . 


cd  ^ 


TO  £'«J  Q>2  ^( 

occ   ~  '  1  - 

CD  CD  CO 

aZ 


C/1  _  CO  I —  ■  —  Z 

CD 


-  2  =  iucn-c 


«  to    .  o  a.  . 


i-5§°2.=°< 

5  =s 


o  -  oo 
>0 

=  zl  =0 

O  CD  O  . 

—  2  *- 

s's  =  i 


—  .2    =  i 

=  TO> 


.  TO 

"If  2 

"  >>  o     e  Sj 

.  -  roO> 

—  ti  TO-c  «2  co 


.-cd  = 

— 1  I   T- 


03 


go 


o  .  _z 

J  lT>    '  CO 

:  I*-  in  O  i_  c  X  <D 

>-  oT  <C  o  qq  to  • 

u  a.  %  IcS   .  g-g 

^ee  to  .gaJ^g? 
a  cd  ro     _      -<  _ 

v_  -O  00  „•  O  —  CD  .TO 
CD  TO     .2  03  =      r-.  ^ 

E       .    •  u.t;N  ro 


J=    .  gcsj 

to  "5m 


J2a.'  E 


— "  CL  CD  O       "E,  < 

-g  o  cd  <•  t;  —  2: 
E°-=?siS  = 

15  01%  J-  C 

".5  =  E</Js  g 

•  Q.  LU  CD      .*=  1= 

_  m  c    -  .^c 

 ^<:CrooCOCVJ<-> 

-a  o  o  c  ■—     <r  •— 

to  ™=  to  to 

q     *2     c3  oo 


■a  )P  A  to  I 

d  -  .        =  £  £o  c"3- 

>- 1 —  _cz  c  ro      cd  ro  k 


-  O  a-> 

2  CDS  < 


2  O  —  £=  C 

oO  Q  CD  - 


cd  o  c    .  roOQ  E  ro  « 

>00ro2  o-o  -2 

So  SN  to  o  "ro  ^  2r—  ce  — « 

O     ■  O-CD  "~  —  -2  —  5^        TO  C 

i2  oo  -J 


639 


-  So  o 


o  2  2 
D-in 


i  —  ^  o  cd  oo  co  <d  c: 
;<  Saro^  o  o  m 


j2  s> 


3X3 
<2  <B 


C  ^-  <D  _ 

a.  o.  a>  —  tz 
o  o  m5  n 


!_ -a      w  co  ,« 

«  2"gi  c  o 

=>      c  g  E  >- 


S2» 

il  OO  Q. 
< 


2"° 


u-> 


c  —  ca      c  00  co 

g  «  CO 

5  S 


S§»-=«5S  £JS 


a    p:  3~  >, 

Z  OO)  O  ^  »! 

cd-^""^  °s< 

H  .  aj  o  r  . 
_cnj<  "  Q-^co 


co     lt>  —i  o 


,^cnajoo  . 
:  g--^  *  S 

•     -  ro  ^  CO 

!  *S75  &  -too 


CD  oo 


"Kit, 


a. 


-a  co 
co  CO 


1-2  " 

--n  CO 


5  Sao, 


co      a.  ■ 
co  ><<£> 
o     15  ^ 

Sz°2  2 


"QS, 


-Isl  2 

o 


O  00 


°  r—  io^ 


2  s£ 


S2i 


co  cd  £  td 

CO™'-  . 

£  S  o 

3  a  "oO  oo 


CD  C  2  CO 

*;  a>  oo 

co  P 

o£  "2 

T3  5  Lu  00  cR  ~  =  <  < 
CM  .— ' 


—  ^ 


on  H- 


o  a>  - 


TO 


O  .!=! 


—  CO  oo 
CD  C5  CD 


co^jo^o^  g^-g  §< .E 


c^ao  ^43 


,±  >  ao" 


,ra|«o^ 
f=  cdoo—  - 


:o  E 


CO  -w  co 
■c  cd  c 


z:  co  —  co 
.2-n<C-) 


CT> 


'< 
oo' 


i_  o  ao  co 
:  <'^<< 
<5  ooc^r 

i_  o 

CD 


CXJOO 

°cjo  " 
— i  cT5 


gS—  cd  E  gS     =  s    r  "oo  > 


>«§|2  2£^d-l 


00  00c 


_C^CD 
O  0)  n 

>  O  . 

CO  •—  <— ) 


0-cn 


CD 


U  — i 

oouo 


640 


™2  0 
in  — ?o> 
ir>  o 


2S 


I-  c:  c 

,  O  rr  QJ 
MM 


T3  II  O) 

c  o  £ 

=  ■—  E, 

P  TO  o 


00 

—  o> 

re  c 

£■5 


■o  — 

is 

£ 

2 


^-O.-P. 


§■2 


!  o  • 


<  »  s  . 


i<5 


c  o 

1!= 


©ir> 
tn2 


Q 


,J3    .      .-1  1 


!r  o  O) 


oc  ro 

.E  <m-S,< 
-r-r  c  =>  c 


c 

o 
Q 


_     S3  cm*"S     J>  -9. 


'.iei 


ft.  <=*_-  c  pc;  MC'J^, 


g.2  -< 


5  5  5: 


0m  E  — 

ra  <-> 


;<  °: 


ra  <r 

CD  {_) 

*-"o  o 

—  C  OO  o 

—  'Zl  GO 

«5  ,1 
J  £°  = 


53  c""o 
^  ra^-O* 

8.25^  = 


S'=  :«=> 


~  >  t= 

cu'e  — 

2=5 


—  x_. 


«  §. 

W<  . 

_  TO  CO 

s 

00  ro  r 

O    !  M 
o  ra 

= 


°j  5 


-.5  22 


r-aoO 

=  o 

ra  b 
O  — 


t_  ra  o 

3  E 

<  cO  ■ 

—  goO 


00^ 

<o  -cr> 
iro  ra 

—  o-^: 
ra0  ra 


»-  CNJ 


Appendix  H 


Selected  Bibliography  of  Publications  in  Weather 
Modification 

American  Meteorological  Society.  Proceedings  of  the  First  National  Conference 
on  Weather  Modification,  April  28-May  1,  1968,  Albany,  New  York.  Boston, 

1968.  532  p. 

 .  Second  National  Conference  on  Weather  Modification,  April  6-9,  1970, 

Santa  Barbara,  California  (preprints).  Boston,  1970.  440  p. 

■  .  Proceedings  of  the  International  Conference  on  Weather  Modification, 

September  6-11,  1971,  Canberra,  Australia.  Sponsored  jointly  by  the  American 
Meteorological  Society  and  the  Australian  Academy  of  Science.  Boston,  1971. 
373  p. 

 .  Third  Conference  on  Weather  Modification,  June  26-29,  1972,  Rapid  City, 

South  Dakota  (preprints).  Boston,  1972.  336  p. 

 .  Fourth  Conference  on  Weather  Modification.  November  18-21,  1974,  Fort 

Lauderdale,  Florida  (preprints).  Boston,  1974.  575  p. 

 .  Abstracts  of  Special  Regional  Weather  Modification  Conference :  Aug- 
mentation of  Winter  Orographic  Precipitation  in  the  Western  United  States, 
November  11-13,  1975,  San  Francisco,  California.  (Co-sponsored  by  the  U.S. 
Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation ;  State  of  California, 
Department  of  Water  Resources;  and  the  Weather  Modification  Association.) 
Boston,  1975.  245  p. 

■  .  Sixth  Conference  on  Planned  and  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification, 

October  10-13.  1977.  Champaign.  Illinois.  Boston.  1977.  396  p. 
Barrett,  Earl  W.  Inadvertent  weather  and  climate  modification.  Critical  reviews 
.  in  environmental  control,  v.  6.  no.  1,  December  1975  : 15-90. 

Battan.  Louis  J.  Harvesting  the  clouds :  advances  in  weather  modification.  Gar- 
den City.  New  York,  Doubleday  and  Company,  1969.  (The  Science  Study 
Series)  148  p. 

Changnon.  Stanley  A..  Jr..  Ray  Jay  Davis,  Barbara  C.  Farhar,  J.  Eugene  Haas, 
J.  Loreena  Ivens.  Martin  Y.  Jones.  Donald  A.  Klein,  Dean  Mann.  Griffith  M. 
Morgan.  Jr..  Steven  T.  Sonka.  Earl  R.  Swanson,  C.  Robert  Taylor,  and  Jon 
Van  Blokland.  Hail  suppression :  impacts  and  issues.  Urbana,  Illinois,  Illinois 
State  Water  Survey,  April  1977.  432  p. 

Changnon,  Stanley  A..  Floyd  A.  Huff.  Paul  T.  Schickedanz.  and  John  T.  Yogel. 
Summary  of  METROMEX,  Volume  1 :  weather  anomalies  and  impacts.  Bulle- 
tin 62.  State  of  Illinois.  Department  of  Registration  and  Education.  (ISWS/ 
BUL-62/77)  Urbana.  Illinois.  Illinois  State  Water  Survey.  1977.  260  p. 

Charak.  Mason  T.  and  Mary  T.  DiGiulian.  Weather  modification  activity  reports ; 
November  1.  1972.  to  December  31,  1973.  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric 
Administration.  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring  and  Prediction.  Rockville, 
Maryland.  March  1974.  40  p. 

Charak.  Mason  T.  Weather  modification  activity  reports:  calendar  year  1974. 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.  Office  of  Environmental 
Monitoring  and  Prediction.  Rockville,  Maryland.  March  1975.  37  p. 

 .  Weather  modification  activity  reports ;  calendar  year  1975.  National 

Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.  Office  of  Environmental  Monitoring 
and  Prediction.  Rockville.  Maryland.  June  1976.  64  p. 

Comptroller  General  of  the  United  States.  Need  for  a  national  weather  modifica- 
tion research  program.  Report  to  the  Congress.  Washington,  U.S.  General 
Accounting  Office.  August  23.  1974.  (B-133202).  64  p. 

Cooper.  Charles  F.  and  William  C.  Jolly.  Ecological  effects  of  weather  modifi- 
cation :  a  problem  analvsis.  Ann  Arbor,  Michigan.  Universitv  of  Michigan,  May 

1969.  160  p. 

Dennis.  A.  S.  and  A.  Gagin.  Recommendations  for  future  research  in  weather 
modification.  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.  National  Oceanic  and  Atmos- 

(641) 


642 


pheric  Administration.  Environmental  Research  Laboratories.  Weather  Modi- 
fication. Program  Office.  Boulder,  Colorado,  November  1977.  112  p. 

Dorsey,  Thomas  A.  and  W.  Henry  Lambright.  Citizen  participation  mechanisms 
and  weather  modification  policy  :  a  survey.  Final  report  to  the  National  Science 
Foundation.  (SRC  TR78-516/NSF  OSS77-19066)  Syracuse,  New  York,  Syra- 
cuse Research  Corporation,  April  1978.  169  p. 

Elliott,  Robert  D.,  Russell  W.  Shaffer,  Arnold  Court,  and  Jack  F.  Hannaford, 
Colorado  River  Basin  Pilot  Project ;  comprehensive  evaluation  report :  five- 
seasons,  1970-1971  .  .  .  1974-1975.  Prepared  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  the 
Interior,  Bureau  of  Reclamation,  Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources 
Management.  Goleta,  California,  Aerometrics,  Inc.,  October  1976.  (report  no. 
ARI-76-1)  650  p. 

Fleagle,  Robert  G.  (editor).  Weather  modification:  science  and  public  policy. 

Seattle.  University  of  Washington  Press,  1968.  147  p. 
Fleagle,  Robert  G.,  James  A.  Crutchfield,  Ralph  W.  Johnson,  and  Mohamed  F. 

Abdo.  Weather  modification  in  the  public  interest.  (Published  by  the  American 

Meteorological  Society  and  the  University  of  Washington  Press)  Seattle,  U.  of 

Washington  Press,  1974.  88  p. 
Grant.  Lewis  O.  and  John  D.  Reid  (compilers).  Workshop  for  an  Assessment 

of  the  Present  and  Potential  Role  of  Weather  Modification  in  Agricultural 

Production,  July  15-18,  1975,  Ft.  Collins,  Colorado.  Colorado  State  University, 

August  1975.  236  p. 

Griffiths,  John  F.  and  M.  Joan  Griffiths.  Bibliography  of  the  urban  modification 
of  the  atmosphere  and  hydrologie  environment.  College  Station,  Texas,  Texas 
A  &  M  University,  Department  of  Meteorology,  February  1974.  100  p. 

Grimes,  Annie  E.  An  annotated  bibliography  on  weather  modification,  1960-1969. 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Environmental  Data  Serv- 
ice, Environmental  Science  Information  Center.  Rockville,  Maryland.  1972 
( NO AA  technical  memorandum  EDS  ESIC-1)  407  p. 

Ilc-is.  Wilmot  N.  (editor).  Weather  and  climate  modification.  New  York,  John 
Wiley  and  Sons,  1974.  842  p.  (Contains  22  chapters  on  various  aspects  of 
weather  modification,  contributed  by  experts  in  various  phases  of  the  field.) 

Halacy,  Daniel  S.,  Jr.  The  weather  changers.  New  York,  Harper  and  Row,  1968. 
246  p. 

Hromocky,  Alexander.  Weather  modification  (bibliography).  Library  of  Congress 
Science  Tracer  Bullet.  (TB  75-5) .  Washington,  June  1975. 13  p. 

Justus,  John  R.  A  bibliography  of  selected  Federal  and  congressional  publica- 
tions on  weather  modification.  Congressional  Research  Service.  Library  of 
Congress.  January  14.  1977.  4  p. 

Kellogg,  William  W.  Is  mankind  warming  the  Earth?  Bulletin  of  the  atomic 
scientists,  v.  34.  February  1978:  10-19. 

Klein,  D.  A.  (editor).  Environmental  impacts  of  nucleating  agents  used  in 
weather  modification.  Stroudsburg,  Pennsylvania,  Dowden,  Hutchison,  and 
Ross  (in  press). 

Matthews,  W.  II..  W.  W.  Kellogg,  and  G.  D.  Robinson,  editors.  Man's  impact  on 
the  climate.  Cambridge.  MIT  Press,  1971.  594  p. 

National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research.  National  Hail  Research  Experiment 
randomized  seeding  experiment,  1972-1974:  final  report.  Boulder,  Colorado, 
December  1976.  In  five  volumes.  260  +  530  4-  313  +  326  +  207  p. 

 .  The  National  Hail  Research  Experiment:  summer  1976  summary  report. 

Boulder,  Colorado,  December  1977.  (NCAR-71 00-77/2.)  217  p. 

National  Research  Council.  Committee  on  Atmospheric  Sciences.  Panel  on 
Weather  and  Climate  Modification.  Weather  and  climate  modifications:  prob- 
lems and  prospects,  (in  two  volumes)  Washington,  National  Academy  of 
Sciences.  1966.  (Publication  No.  1350.)  40  +  212  p. 

 .  Weather  and  climate  modification:  problems  and  progress.  Washington, 

National  Academy  of  Sciences,  1973.  (ISBN  0-309-02121-9).  280  p. 

 U.S.  Committee  for  the  Global  Atmospheric  Research  Program.  Under- 

derstanding  climatic  change:  a  program  for  action.  Washington,  National 
Academy  Of  Sciences,  1975,  239  p. 

 Geophysics  Research  Board.  Energy  and  climate.  Washington,  National 

Academy  of  Sciences.  1977,  281  p. 

Newell.  Homer  E.  A  recommended  national  program  in  weather  modification. 
Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee  for 
Atmospheric  Sciences.  (I CAS  report  no.  10a).  Washington,  November  19GG. 
93  p. 


643 


North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modification  Council.  Conference  on  Weather 
Modification— a  Usable  Technology ;  its  Potential  Impact  on  the  World  Food 
Crisis.  January  16-17,  1975,  Denver,  Colorado.  (Pub.  75-1).  150  p. 

.  .  Conference  on  Weather  Modification,  Today  and  Tomorrow.  Second  an- 
nual meeting  of  the  NAIWMC,  January  15-16,  1976,  Kansas  City,  Missouri. 
(Pub.  no.  76-1).  119  p. 

■  .  Legal  uncertainties  and  legislation  in  weather  modification.  Special  and 

third  annual  meetings  of  the  Council.  August  5-6,  1976  and  December  2-3.  1976, 
both  in  Denver,  Colorado.  (NAIWMC  Pub.  no.  77-1.)  Las  Cruces,  New  Mexico, 
September  1977.  173  p. 

Robinson,  G.  D.  (editor).  Report  on  the  Third  Inadvertent  Weather  Modification 
Workshop,  Hartford,  Connecticut,  May  23-27,  1977.  (CEM  Report  4215- 
604)  Hartford,  Connecticut,  The  Center  for  the  Environment  and  Man,  No- 
vember 1977.  167  p. 

Sewell,  W.  R.  D.,  et  al.  Modifying  the  weather:  a  social  assessment.  Western 
geographical  series,  vol.  9.  Victoria,  British  Columbia,  University  of  Victoria, 
July  1973.  349  p. 

Smith,  Ivan  C.  and  Bonnie  L.  Carson.  Trace  metals  in  the  environment :  vol.  2, 
silver.  Ann  Arbor,  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor  Science  Publishers,  1977.  490  p. 

Special  Commission  on  Weather  Modification.  Weather  and  climate  modification. 
Report  to  the  National  Science  Foundation.  NSF  66-3.  Washington,  D.C.,  De- 
cember 20,  1965.  155  p. 

State  of  South  Dakota.  Department  of  Natural  Resources  Development.  Division 
of  Weather  Modification.  Conference  on  Weather  Modification  in  the  United 
States ;  Potential  and  Problems  for  Interstate  Action.  Sioux  Falls,  South  Da- 
kota, June  10-12, 1974,  248  p. 

(This  conference,  called  by  the  Governor  of  South  Dakota,  was  attended 
by  officials  from  23  States  and  from  the  Canadian  Province  of  Alberta  and 
resulted  in  the  formation  of  the  North  American  Interstate  Weather  Modifica- 
tion Council.) 

Steinhoff,  Harold  W.  and  Jack  D.  Ives  (editors).  Ecological  impacts  of  snow- 
pack  augmentation  in  the  San  Juan  Mountains,  Colorado.  Final  report  of  the 
San  Juan  Ecology  Project  to  the  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  Prepared  by  Colorado 
State  University,  Fort  Collins,  Colorado;  University  of  Colorado,  Boulder, 
.  Colorado;  and  Fort  Lewis  College,  Durango,  Colorado,  March  9.  1976.  489  p. 

Taubenfeld,  Howard  J.  (editor).  Controlling  the  weather;  a  study  of  law  and 
regulatory  processes.  New  York,  Dunellen,  1970.  275  p. 

Thomas,  William  A.  (editor),  Legal  and  scientific  uncertainties  of  weather  modi- 
fication. (Proceedings  of  a  symposium  convened  at  Duke  University,  March  11- 
12,  1976,  by  the  National  Conference  of  Lawyers  and  Scientists.)  Durham, 
North  Carolina,  Duke  University  Press,  1977.  155  p. 

U.S.  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control.  Final  report  of  the  Advisory 
Committee  on  Weather  Control,  (in  two  volumes)  Washington,  U.S.  Govt. 
Print.  Off..  December  31,  1957.  32  4-  422  p.  (Volume  II  contains  2259  refer- 
ences on  U.S.  and  foreign  works  on  weather  modification  and  related  subjects 
through  1957.) 

U.S.  Congress.  House  of  Representatives.  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology. 
Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and  the  Atmosphere.  Weather  modification. 
Hearings,  94th  Congress,  2d  session.  June  15,  16,  17,  and  18,  1976.  (No.  79) 
Washington,  U.S.  Govt.  Print.  Off.,  1976.  524  p. 

U.S.  Congress.  Senate.  Committee  on  Commerce.  Subcommittee  on  Oceans  and 
Atmosphere.  Atmospheric  Research  Control  Act.  Hearing.  94th  Congress,  2d 
session,  on  S.  2705.  S.  2706,  and  S.  2707.  February  17,  1976.  Washington.  U.S. 
Govt.  Print.  Off..  1976.  297  p. 

U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administra- 
tion. Summary  report:  weather  modification;  fiscal  years  1969.  1970.  1971. 
Office  of  the  Assistant  Administrator  for  Environmental  Monitoring  and  Pre- 
diction. Rockville,  Maryland.  May  1973.  163  p. 

 .  Summary  report:  weather  modification:  fiscal  year  1972.  Office  of  En- 
vironmental Monitoring  and  Prediction.  Rockville,  Marvland,  November  1973. 
226  p. 

 .  Summary  report :  weather  modification ;  fiscal  year  1973.  Office  of  En- 
vironmental Monitoring  and  Prediction.  Rockville,  Maryland,  December  1974. 
154  p. 

 ■•.  Draft  environmental  impact  statement  (EIS)  for  the  hurricane  ameliora- 
tion research  project.  Rockville,  Maryland,  February  1978.  192  p. 


644 


U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.  Environmental  Data  Service.  Weather  modifica- 
tion (bibliography).  Packaged  literature  search  77-1.  Washington,  D.C.,  April 
1977.  (NOAA-S/T  77-2759) ,  159  p. 

 .  Environmental  Research  Laboratories.  Weather  Modification  Program 

Office.  Collected  reprints:  1975-1976.  Boulder,  Colorado,  May  1977.  667  p. 
(This  is  a  volume  of  collected  reprints  published  by  NOAA's  Weather  Modifi- 
cation Program  Office,  including  reports  of  research  directed  and  supported 
by  WMPO  that  appeared  in  1975  and  1976  as  journal  articles  or  in  conference 
proceedings  as  well  as  some  unpublished  documentation  otherwise  difficult  to 
obtain;  abstracts  are  included  of  papers  published  in  the  NOAA  Technical 
Report  and  Technical  Memorandum  series.) 

U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior.  Bureau  of  Reclamation.  Division  of  Atmospheric 
Water  Resources  Management.  Project  Skywater :  1973-74  biennial  report. 
Denver,  December  1976.  (REC-ERC-76-21.) 

 .  Precipitation,  man,  and  the  environment ;  an  overview  of  Skywater  IX 

Conference,  Vail,  Colorado,  second  week  of  November  1976.  Denver,  September 
1977.  223  p.  (This  is  the  latest  published  proceedings  of  a  series  of  Skywater 
Conferences,  the  first  of  which  was  held  in  Denver  in  July  1967 :  the  most 
recent  Skywater  X  Conference  was  held  in  June  1978  at  Lake  Tahoe, 
California. 

 .  Final  environmental  statement  for  Project  Skywater ;  a  program  of  re- 
search in  precipitation  management.  Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources 
Management.  (INT  FES  77-39.)  Denver,  October  25,  1977.  In  three  volumes. 
376  +  316  +  266  p. 

U.S.  Domestic  Council.  Environmental  Resources  Committee.  Subcommittee  on 
Climate  Change.  The  Federal  role  in  weather  modification.  Washington,  1975. 
39  p. 

U.S.  Federal  Coordinating  Council  for  Science,  Engineering,  and  Technology. 
Committee  on  Atmosphere  and  Oceans.  A  United  States  climate  program  plan. 
Washington,  1977.  81  p.  (ICAS  20b-FY  77) 

U.S.  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology.  Interdepartmental  Committee 
for  Atmospheric  Sciences.  A  national  program  for  accelerating  progress  in 
weather  modification.  (ICAS  report  no.  15a.)  Washington,  June  1971.  50  p. 

U.S.  Federal  Council  for  Science  and  Technology  and  Council  on  Environmental 
Quality.  Fluorocarbons  and  the  environment.  Report  of  the  Federal  Task  Force 
on  Inadvertent  Modification  of  the  Stratosphere  (IMOS).  Washington,  U.S. 
Govt.  Print.  Off.,  1975.  109  p. 

U.S.  Library  of  Congress.  Legislative  Reference  Service.  Weather  modification 
and  control ;  a  report  prepared  by  Lawton  M.  Hartman  for  the  use  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Commerce,  U.S.  Senate.  (89th  Congress,  2d  session,  Senate.  Report 
no.  1139.)  Washington.  U.S.  Govt.  Print.  Off..  1966. 181  p. 

U.S.  Library  of  Congress.  Congressional  Research  Service.  A  primer  on  climatic 
variation  and  change.  Prepared  for  the  Subcommittee  on  the  Environment  and 
the  Atmosphere  of  the  Committee  on  Science  and  Technology.  U.S.  House  of 
Representatives.  94th  Congress,  2d  session.  September  1976.  Washington.  U.S. 
Govt.  Print.  Off..  1976.  403  p. 

Weisbecker,  Leo  W.  (compiler).  The  impacts  of  snow  enhancement:  technology 
assessment  of  winter  orographic  snowpack  augmentation  in  the  upper  Colo- 
rado River  basin.  Norman,  Oklahoma,  University  of  Oklahoma  Press,  1974. 
624  p. 

White.  Fred  D.  Highlights  of  solicited  opinions  on  weather  modification  (a  sum- 
mary). (Prepared  for  use  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce  Weather  Modi- 
fication Advisory  "Board:  summarized  from  background  papers  on  various 
aspects  of  weather  modification,  solicited  from  17  experts  in  various  phases  of 
weather  modification.)  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce.  National  Oceanic  and 
Atmospheric  Administration.  Rockville.  Maryland,  March  1977.  39  p. 

Wtt  on,  Carroll  L..  editor.  Man's  impact  on  the  global  environment.  Report  of  the 
Study  of  Critical  Environmental  Problems  (SCEP).  Cambridge,  MIT  Press, 

1070.  319  p. 

Wilson,  C.  L.  and  W.  H.  Matthews,  editors.  Inadvertent  climate  modification.  Re- 
port of  the  Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  Climate  (SMIC).  Cambridge.  MIT  Press, 

1071.  308  p. 

Woodley,  William  L.  and  Robert  T.  Sax.  The  Florida  Area  Cumulus  Experiment- 
rationale,  design,  procedures,  results,  and  future  course.  U.S.  Department  of 
Commerce.  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration.  Environmental 
Research  Laboratories.  (NOAA  technical  report  ERL  354-WMPO  6.)  Boulder, 
Colorado,  January  1076.  204  p. 


645 


World  Meteorological  Organization.  Proceedings  of  the  WMO/IAMAP  Scientific 

Conference  on  Weather  Modification,  October  1-7,  1973,  Tashkent,  USSR. 

Geneva,  1974.  (WMO  No.  399.)  566  p. 
 .  Papers  presented  at  the  Second  WMO  Scientific  Conference  on  Weather 

Modification,  August  2-6,  1976,  Boulder,  Colorado.  Geneva,  1976.  (WMO  No. 

443.)  597  p. 

 .  Weather  Modification  Programme.  Plan  for  the  Precipitation  Enhance- 
ment Project  (PEP).  PEP  report  No.  3.  Geneva,  November  1976.  43  p. 

 .  Register  of  national  weather  modification  projects :  1976.  Geneva,  1977. 

28  p. 


Appendix  I 

Public  Laws  Dealing  Specifically  With  Weather  Modification 

August  13.  1953  Public  Law  256 — Chapter  426 

IS.  285] 

AN  ACT  To  create  a  committee  to  study  and  evaluate  public  and  private 
experiments  in  weather  modification. 

Weather  modi-  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
FvaVnation         United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled, 


STATEMENT    OF  PURPOSE   AND  POLICY 

Research  and  experimentation  in  the  field  of  weather  modifica- 
tion and  control  have  attained  the  stage  at  which  the  applica- 
tion of  scientific  advances  in  this  field  appears  to  be  practical. 

The  effect  of  the  use  of  measures  for  the  control  of  weather  phe- 
nomena upon  the  social,  economic,  and  political  structures  of 
today,  and  upon  national  security,  cannot  now  be  determined.  It  is 
a  field  in  which  unknown  factors  are  involved.  It  is  reasonable 
to  anticipate,  however,  that  modification  and  control  of  weather, 
if  effective  on  a  large  scale,  would  cause  profound  changes  in  our 
present  way  of  life  and  would  result  in  vast  and  far-reaching 
benefits  to  agriculture,  industry,  commerce,  and  the  general  wel- 
fare and  common  defense. 

While  the  ultimate  extent  to  which  weather  modification  and 
control  may  be  utilized  is  speculative,  the  application  of  such 
measures  without  proper  safeguards,  sufficient  data  and  accurate 
information  may  result  in  inadequate  or  excessive  precipitation ; 
may  cause  catastrophic  droughts,  storms,  floods,  and  other 
phenomena  with  consequent  loss  of  life  and  property,  injury  to 
navigable  streams  and  other  channels  of  interstate  and  foreign 
commerce,  injury  to  water  supplies  for  municipal,  irrigation,  and 
industrial,  purposes,  and  injury  to  sources  of  hydroelectric  power  : 
may  otherwise  impede  the  production  and  transportation  of  goods 
and  services  for  domestic  consumption  and  export  and  for  the 
national  defense;  and  may  otherwise  adversely  affect  the  gen- 
eral welfare  and  common  defense. 

Thorough  experimentation  and  full-scale  operations  in  weather 
modification  and  control  will  of  necessity  affect  areas  extending 
across  State  and  possibly  across  national  boundaries.  The  Con- 
gress, therefore,  recognizes  that  experimentation  and  applica- 
tion of  such  measures  are  matters  of  national  and  international 
concern. 

Accordingly,  it  is  hereby  declared  to  be  the  policy  of  the  Con- 
press,  in  order  to  effect  the  maximum  benefit  which  may  result 
from  experiments  and  operations  designed  to  modify  and  control 
went  her.  to  correlate  and  evaluate  the  information  derived  from 
such  activity  and  to  cooperate  with  the  several  States  and  the 
duly  authorized  officials  thereof  with  respect  to  such  activity,  all 
to  the  end  of  encouraging  the  intelligent  experimentation  and  the 
beneficial  development  of  weather  modification  and  control,  pre- 
venting its  harmful  and  indiscriminate  exercise,  and  fostering 
sound  economic  conditions  in  the  public  interest. 

CREATION   OF  ADVISORY   COMMITTEE   ON   WEATHER  CONTROL 

Sec.  2.  There  is  hereby  established  a  national  committee  to  he 
known  as  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather  Control  (herein- 
after called  the  "Committee"). 

(G46) 


647 


Sec.  3.  The  Committee  shall  make  a  complete  study  and  evalua- 
tion of  public  and  private  experiments  in  weather  control  for  the 
purpose  of  determining  the  extent  to  which  the  United  States 
should  experiment  with,  engage  in,  or  regulate  activities  designed 
to  control  weather  conditions. 

Sec.  4.  The  Committee  shall  be  composed  of  the  Secretary  of 
Defense  or  his  designee,  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  or  his 
designee,  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  or  his  designee,  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Interior  or  his  designee,  the  Director  of  the  National 
Science  Foundation  or  his  designee,  the  Secretary  of  Health, 
Education,  and  Welfare  or  his  designee,  and  five  members  ap- 
pointed by  the  President,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  Senate,  from  among  persons  in  private  life  of  outstanding 
ability  in  the  fields  of  science,  agriculture,  and  business.  A 
vacancy  in  the  Committee  shall  not  affect  its  powers  but  shall  be 
tilled  in  the  same  manner  that  the  original  appointment  was  made. 

Sec.  5.  The  President  shall  appoint  the  Chairman  and  Vice 
Chairman  of  the  Committee.  The  Chairman  shall  be  appointed 
from  among  those  persons  appointed  to  the  Committee  from 
private  life. 

Sec  6.  The  Committee  shall  hold  at  least  two  meetings  a  year, 
approximately  six  months  apart,  and.  on  due  notice,  shall  meet  at 
such  other  times  as  the  Committee  may  determine.  Six  members 
of  the  Committee  shall  constitute  a  quorum. 

Sec.  7.  The  members  of  the  Committee  who  are  in  the  executive 
branch  of  the  Government  shall  receive  no  additional  compensa- 
tion for  their  services  on  the  Committee.  The  members  from 
private  life  shall  each  receive  $50  per  diem  when  engaged  in  the 
performance  of  duties  vested  in  the  Committee.  All  members  of 
the  Committee  sball  be  reimbursed  in  accordance  with  the  Travel 
Expense  Act  of  1949,  as  amended,  for  travel,  subsistence,  and 
other  necessary  expenses  incurred  by  them  in  the  performance  of 
duties  vested  in  the  Committee. 

Sec.  S.  The  Committee  shall  have  power  to  appoint  and  fix  the 
compensation  of  such  officers  and  employees  as  may  be  necessary 
to  carry  out  the  functions  of  the  Committee,  including  one  execu- 
tive secretary  at  a  salary  not  exceeding  $12,000  per  annum. 
Officers  and  employees  other  than  the  executive  secretary  shall  be 
appointed  in  accordance  with  the  Classification  Act  of  1949,  as 
amended,  except  that  to  the  extent  the  Committee  deems  such 
action  necessary  to.  the  discharge  of  its  responsibilities,  personnel 
for  positions  requiring  scientific  or  special  qualifications  may  be 
employed  and  their  compensation  fixed  without  regard  to  such 
laws.  The  Committee  shall  make  adqeuate  provision  for  adminis- 
trative review  of  any  determination  to  dismiss  any  employee. 

Sec.  9.  (a)  The  Committee,  or  any  member  thereof,  may.  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  hold  such 
hearings  and  sit  and  act  at  such  times  and  places,  and  take  such 
testimony  as  the  Committee  shall  deem  advisable.  Any  member 
of  the  Committee  may  administer  oaths  or  affirmations  to  wit- 
nesses appearing  before  the  Committee  or  before  such  member. 

(b)  The  Committee  is  authorized  to  secure  directly  from  any 
executive  department,  bureau,  agency,  board,  commission,  office, 
independent  establishment,  or  instrumentality  information,  sug- 
gestions, estimates,  and  statistics  for  the  purpose  of  this  Act ;  and 
each  such  department,  bureau,  agency,  board,  commission,  office, 
establishment,  or  instrumentality  is  authorized  and  directed  to 
furnish  such  information,  suggestions,  estimates,  and  statistics 
directly  to  the  Committee,  upon  request  made  by  the  Chairman 
or  Vice  Chairman. 

(c)  The  Committee  may,  with  the  consent  of  the  agency  con- 
cerned, accept  and  utilize,  on  a  reimbursable  basis,  the  personnel 
of  any  other  agency  of  the  Federal  Government. 

(d)  (1)  The  Committee  shall  be  entitled  by  regulation,  subpena, 
or  otherwise,  to  obtain  such  information  from,  require  such  reports 
and  the  keeping  of  such  records  by,  and  make  such  inspection  of 


Members. 


Meetings. 


Compensation. 


63  Stat.  160. 
5  USC  S35  note. 

Officers  and 
employees. 


63  Stat.  954. 
5  USC  1071 
note. 


Hearings. 


Information, 
etc.,  from 
agencies. 


Personnel  of 
other  agencien. 


Information 
from  persons. 


648 


Witness  fees. 
Penalty. 


Confidential 
information. 


Use  of  mails. 


Report. 


Termination 
date. 

Appropriation. 


the  books,  records,  and  other  writings,  premises  or  property  of, 
any  person  as  may  be  necessary  or  appropriate  to  carry  out  the 
provisions  of  this  Act,  but  this  authority  shall  not  be  exercised  if 
adequate  and  authoritative  data  are  available  from  any  Federal 
agency.  In  case  of  contumacy  by,  or  refusal  to  obey  a  subpena 
served  upon,  any  person  referred  to  in  this  subsection,  the  district 
court  of  the  United  States  for  any  district  in  which  such  person 
is  found  or  resides  or  transacts  business,  upon  application  by  the 
Committee,  shall  have  jurisdiction  to  issue  an  order  requiring  such 
person  to  appear  and  give  testimony  or  to  appear  and  produce  doc- 
uments, or  both :  and  any  failure  to  obey  such  order  of  the  court 
may  be  punished  by  such  court  as  a  contempt  thereof. 

(2)  The  production  of  a  person's  books,  records,  or  other  docu- 
mentary evidence  shall  not  be  required  at  any  place  other  than 
the  place  where  such  person  usually  keeps  them,  if,  prior  to  the 
return  date  specified  in  the  regulations,  subpena,  or  other  docu- 
ment issued  with  respect  thereto,  such  person  furnishes  the  Com- 
mittee with  a  true  copy  of  such  books,  records,  or  other  documen- 
tary evidence  (certified  by  such  person  under  oath  to  be  a  true 
and  correct  copy)  or  enters  into  a  stipulation  with  the  Committee 
as  to  the  information  contained  in  such  books,  records,  or  other 
documentary  evidence.  Witnesses  shall  be  paid  the  same  fees  and 
mileage  that  are  paid  witnesses  in  the  courts  of  the  United  States. 

(3)  Any  person  who  willfully  performs  any  act  prohibited  or 
willfully  fails  to  perform  any  act  required  by  the  above  provisions 
of  this  subsection,  or  any  rule,  regulation,  or  order  thereunder, 
shall  upon  conviction  be  fined  not  more  than  $500  for  each  offense. 

(4)  Information  obtained  under  this  Act  which  the  Committee 
deems  confidential  for  purposes  of  national  security  or  other 
reasons  or  with  reference  to  which  a  request  for  confidential  treat- 
ment is  made  by  the  person  or  agency  furnishing  such  information, 
shall  not  be  published  or  disclosed  unless  the  Committee  deter- 
mines that  the  withholding  thereof  is  contrary  to  the  purposes  of 
this  Act,  and  any  member  or  employee  of  the  Committee  willfully 
violating  this  provision  shall,  upon  conviction,  be  fined  not  more 
than  $5,000. 

( e)  The  Committee  shall  be  entitled  to  the  free  use  of  the  United 
Stales  mails  in  the  same  manner  as  the  other  executive  agencies 
of  the  Government. 

Sec.  10.  (a)  The  Committee  shall  from  time  to  time  submit  a 
report  on  its  findings  and  recommendations  to  the  President  for 
submission  to  the  Congress.  At  the  earliest  possible  moment,  the 
Committee  shall  submit  a  report  to  the  President  for  submission  to 
the  Congress  on  the  advisability  of  the  Federal  Government  regu- 
lating, by  means  of  licenses  or  otherwise,  those  who  attempt  to 
engage  in  activities  designed  to  modify  or  control  the  weather. 
The  Committee  shall  submit  a  final  report  to  the  President  for 
submission  to  the  Congress  not.  later  than  June  30,  1056. 

(b)  Thirty  days  after  the  Committee  has  submitted  such  final 
report  to  the  President,  the  Committee  shall  cease  to  exist. 

Sec  11.  There  are  authorized  to  be  appropriated,  from  any 
funds  in  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  such  sums  as 
the  Congress  may  from  time  to  time  deem  necessary  to  carry  out 
the  provisions  of  this  Act. 

Approved  August  13,  1953. 


July  o.  inse 
[8.  29131 


15  USC  811 
note. 


Public  Law  661— Chapter  522 

AN  ACT  To  oxtend  for  two  years  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Weather 

Control. 

Be  it  enacted  hi/  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of 
the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled.  That  section 
10 1  a  I  of  the  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  create  a  committee  to  study 
and  evaluate  public  and  private  experiments  in  weather  modifica- 
tion", approved  August  13.  1953  (67  Stat.  551).  561).  is  anieuded 
by  striking  out  ''.June  30,  1056"  and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof  "June 
30,  1058". 

Approved  July  9, 1956. 


649 


Public  Law  85-510 

AX  ACT  To  amend  the  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950,  to  pro-  fH1^,*}'  195S 

vide  for  a  program  of  study,  research,  and  evaluation  in  the  field  of  kE:  bbi  

weather  modification. 


Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of 
the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  sub- 
section (a)  of  section  3  of  the  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of 
1950.  as  amended,  is  amended  by  striking  out  "and"  at  the  end  of 
paragraph  (7),  by  striking  out  the  period  at  the  end  of  paragraph 
(8)  and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof  a  semicolon,  and  by  adding  after 
paragraph  (8)  the  following  new  paragraph: 

"(9)  to  initiate  and  support  a  program  of  study,  research, 
and  evaluation  in  the  held  of  weather  modification,  giving 
particular  attention  to  areas  that  have  experienced  floods, 
drought,  hail,  lightning,  fog,  tornadoes,  hurricanes,  or  other 
weather  phenomena,  and  to  report  annually  to  the  President 
and  the  Congress  thereon." 

Sec.  2.  The  National  Science  Foundation  Act  of  1950,  as 
amended,  is  amended  by  changing  the  designations  of  sections  14, 
15,  and  16  (and  all  reference  to  such  sections  in  any  provision  of 
law)  to  15,  16,  and  17,  respectively,  and  by  inserting  after  section 
13  the  following  section  : 

"weather  modification 

"Sec.  14.  (a)  In  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  paragraph  (9) 
of  section  3  (a),  the  Foundation  shall  consult  with  meteorologists 
and  scientists  in  private  life  and  with  agencies  of  Government 
interested  in,  or  affected  by,  experimental  research  in  the  field 
of  weather  control. 

"(b)  Research  programs  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  such 
paragraph  (9),  whether  conducted  by  the  Foundation  or  by  other 
Government  agencies  or  departments,  may  be  accomplished 
through  contracts  with,  or  grants  to,  private  or  public  institutions 
or  agencies,  including  but  not  limited  to  cooperative  programs 
with  any  State  through  such  instrumentalities  as  may  be  desig- 
nated by  the  governor  of  such  State. 

"(c)  For  the  purposes  of  such  paragraph  (9),  the  Foundation 
is  authorized  to  accept  as  a  gift,  money,  material,  or  services : 
Provided,  That  notwithstanding  section  11(f),  use  of  any  such 
gift,  if  the  donor  so  specifies,  may  be  restricted  or  limited  to  cer- 
tain projects  or  areas. 

"(d)  For  the  purposes  of  such  paragraph  (9),  other  agencies  of 
the  Government  are  authorized  to  loan  to  the  Foundation  without 
reimbursement,  and  the  Foundation  is  authorized  to  accept  and 
make  use  of,  such  property  and  personnel  as  may  be  deemed 
useful,  with  the  approval  of  the  Director  of  the  Bureau  of  the 
Budget. 

"(e)  The  Director  of  the  Foundation,  or  any  employee  of  the 
Foundation  designated  by  him,  may  for  the  purpose  of  carrying 
out  the  provisions  of  such  paragraph  (9)  hold  such  hearings  and 
sit  and  act  at  such  times  and  places  and  take  such  testimony 
as  he  shall  deem  advisable.  The  Director  or  any  employee  of  the 
Foundation  designated  by  him  may  administer  oaths  or  affirma- 
tions to  witnesses  appearing  before  the  Director  or  such  employee. 

"(f)  (1)  The  Director  of  the  Foundation  may  obtain  by  regula- 
tion, subpena,  or  otherwise  such  information  in  the  form  of 
testimony,  books,  records,  or  other  writings,  may  require  the 
keeping  of  and  furnishing  such  reports  and  records,  and  may 
make  such  inspections  of  the  books,  records,  and  other  writings 
and  premises  or  property  of  any  person  or  persons  as  may  be 
deemed  necessary  or  appropriate  by  him  to  carry  out  the  provi- 
sions of  such  paragraph  (9),  but  this  authority  shall  not  be 
exercised  if  adequate  and  authoritative  data  are  available  from 
any  Federal  agency.  In  case  of  contumacy  by,  or  refusal  to  obey 
a  subpena  served  upon,  any  person  referred  to  in  this  subsection, 


National 
Science 
Foundation. 
Weather 
modification. 
Research. 
64  Stat.  149. 
42  USC  1862. 


Reports. 


64  Stat.  134. 
42  USC 
1S73-75. 


Research 
contracts. 


Gifts. 

42  USC  1S70. 


Loan  of 
property,  etc. 


Hearings. 


Documentary 
evidence. 


650 


Violation 
and  penalty. 


G2  Stat.  791. 


Weather 

modification 

reporting. 


85  STAT.  735 
85  STAT.  736 


Report 
requirement. 


the  district  court  of  the  United  States  for  any  district  in  which 
such  person  is  found  or  resides  or  transacts  business,  upon  appli- 
cation by  the  Director,  shall  have  jurisdiction  to  issue  an  order 
requiring  such  person  to  appear  and  give  testimony  or  to  appear 
and  produce  documents,  or  both ;  and  any  failure  to  obey  such 
order  of  the  court  may  be  punished  by  such  court  as  a  contempt 
thereof. 

"(2)  The  production  of  a  person's  books,  records,  or  other 
documentary  evidence  shall  not  be  required  at  any  place  other 
than  the  place  where  such  person  usually  keeps  them,  if,  prior  to 
the  return  date  specified  in  the  regulations,  subpena,  or  other 
document  issued  with  respect  thereto,  such  person  furnishes  the 
Foundation  with  a  true  copy  of  such  books,  records,  or  other 
documentary  evidence  (certified  by  such  person  under  oath  to 
be  a  true  and  correct  copy)  or  enters  into  a  stipulation  with  the 
Director  as  to  the  information  contained  in  such  books,  records, 
or  other  documentary  evidence.  Witnesses  shall  be  paid  the  same 
fees  and  mileage  that  are  paid  witnesses  in  the  courts  of  the 
United  States. 

"(3)  Any  person  who  willfully  performs  any  act  prohibited  or 
willfully  fails  to  perform  any  act  required  by  the  above  provi- 
sions of  this  subsection,  or  any  regulation  issued  thereunder,  shall 
upon  conviction  be  fined  not  more  than  $500. 

"(4)  Information  contained  in  any  statement,  report,  record,  or 
other  document  furnished  pursuant  to  this  subsection  shall  be 
available  for  public  inspection,  except  (A)  information  authorized 
or  required  by  statute  to  be  withheld  and  (B)  information 
classified  in  accordance  with  law  to  protect  the  national  security. 
The  foregoing  sentence  shall  not  be  interpreted  to  authorize  or 
require  the  publication,  divulging,  or  disclosure  of  any  informa- 
tion described  in  section  1905  of  title  18  of  the  United  States  Code, 
except  that  the  Director  may  disclose  information  described  in 
such  section  1905,  furnished  pursuant  to  this  subsection,  whenever 
he  determines  that  the  withholding  thereof  would  be  contrary  to 
the  purposes  of  this  section  and  section  3(a)  (9)  of  this  Act." 

Approved  July  11,  1958. 

Public  Law  92-205— 92nd  Congress,  H.R.  6893 
December  18,  1971 

AX  ACT  To  provide  for  the  reporting  of  weather  modification  activities  to 
the  Federal  Government. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That,  as  used  in 
this  Act— 

(1)  The  term  "Secretary"  means  the  Secretary  of  Commerce. 

(2)  The  term  "person"  means  any  individual,  corporation,  com- 
pany, association,  firm,  partnership,  society,  joint  stock  company, 
any  State  or  local  government  or  any  agency  thereof,  or  any  other 
organization,  whether  commercial  or  nonprofit,  who  is  perform- 
ing weather  modification  activities,  except  where  acting  solely 
as  an  employee,  agent,  or  independent  contractor  of  the  Federal 
Government. 

(3)  The  term  "weather  modification"  means  any  activity  per- 
formed with  the  intention  of  producing  artificial  changes  in  the 
composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics  of  the  atmosphere. 

(4)  The  term  "United  States"  includes  the  several  States,  the 
District  of  Columbia,  the  Commonwealth  of  Puerto  Rico,  and  any 
territory  or  insular  possession  of  the  United  States. 

Sec.  2.  No  person  may  engage,  or  attempt  to  engage,  in  any 
weather  modification  activity  in  the  United  States  unless  he  sub- 
mits to  the  Secretary  such  reports  with  respect  thereto,  in  such 
form  and  containing  such  information,  as  the  Secretary  may  by 


651 


rule  prescribe.  The  Secretary  may  require  that  such  reports  be  sub- 
mitted to  him  before,  during,  aud  after  any  such  activity  or 
attempt. 

Sec.  3.  (a)  The  Secretary  shall  maintain  a  record  of  weather 
modification  activities,  including  attempts,  which  take  place  in  the 
United  States  and  shall  publish  summaries  thereof  from  time  to 
time  as  he  determines. 

(b)  All  reports,  documents,  and  other  information  received  by 
the  Secretary  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  made  avail- 
able to  the  public  to  the  fullest  practicable  extent. 

(c)  In  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  section,  the  Secretary 
shall  not  disclose  any  information  referred  to  in  section  1905  of 
title  18,  United  States  Code,  and  is  otherwise  unavailable  to  the 
public,  except  that  such  information  shall  be  disclosed — 

(1)  to  other  Federal  Government  departments,  agencies, 
and  officials  for  official  use  upon  request ; 

(2)  in  any  judicial  proceeding  under  a  court  order  formu- 
lated to  preserve  the  confidentiality  of  such  information  with- 
out impairing  the  proceeding  ;  and 

(3)  to  the  public  if  necessary  to  protect  their  health  and 
safety. 

Sec.  4.  (a)  The  Secretary  may  obtain  from  any  person  whose  ac- 
tivities relate  to  weather  modification  by  rule,  subpena,  or  other- 
wise such  information  in  the  form  of  testimony,  books,  records, 
or  other  writings,  may  require  the  keeping  and  furnishing  of  such 
reports  and  records,  and  may  make  such  inspection  of  the  books, 
records,  and  other  writings  and  premises  and  property  of  any  per- 
son as  may  be  deemed  necessary  or  appropriate  by  him  to  carry 
out  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  but  this  authority  shall  not  be  exer- 
cised to  obtain  any  information  with  respect  to  which  adequate 
and  authoritative  data  are  available  from  any  Federal  agency. 

(b)  In  case  of  contumacy  by,  or  refusal  to  obey  a  subpena  served 
upon  any  person  pursuant  to  this  section,  the  district  court  of  the 
United  States  for  any  district  in  which  such  person  is  found  or 
resides  or  transacts  business,  upon  application  by  the  Attorney 
General,  shall  have  jurisdiction  to  issue  an  order  requiring  such 
person  to  appear  and  give  testimony  or  to  appear  and  produce 
documents,  or  both ;  and  any  failure  to  obey  such  order  of  the 
court  may  be  punished  by  such  court  as  a  contempt  thereof. 

Sec.  5.  Any  person  who  knowingly  and  willfully  violates  section 
2  of  this  Act,  or  any  rule  issued  thereunder,  shall  upon  conviction 
thereof  be  fined  not  more  than  $10,000. 

Sec  6.  There  are  authorized  to  be  appropriated  $150,000  for 
the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30, 1972,  and  $200,000  each  for  the  fiscal 
years  ending  June  30,  1973,  and  June  30,  1974,  to  carry  out  the 
provisions  of  this  Act. 

Approved  December  18,  1971. 


Records, 
publication. 


Confidential 
information. 

62  Stat.  791. 


Authority  of 
Secretary. 


Noncompliance. 


Penalty. 

Appropriation* 


Public  Law  93-436— 93rd  Congress,  S.  3320 
October  5,  1974 

AN  ACT  To  extend  the  appropriation  authorization  for  reporting  of 
weather  modification  activities. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  section  6 
of  the  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  provide  for  the  reporting  of  weather 
modification  activities  to  the  Federal  Government",  approved  De- 
cember 18.  1971  (15  U.S.C.  330e),  is  amended  by  striking  out  "end- 
ing June  30,  1973,  and  June  30,  1974,"  and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof 
"1973,  1974,  1975,  1976,  and  1977,". 

Approved  October  5,  1974. 


88  Stat.  1212 


Weather 

modification 

reporting. 

Appropriation, 

extension. 


652 


Oct.  13,  1076 
[S.  3383] 

National 
Weather 
Modification 
Policy  Act 
of  1976. 
1 5  USC  330 
note. 

15  I'SC  330 
note. 


Policy. 
Research  and 
development 
program. 


15  DSC  330 
note. 


Public  Law  94-490— 94th  Congress 
October  13,  1976 

AN  ACT  To  authorize  and  direct  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  to  develop  a 
national  policy  on  weather  modification,  and  tor  other  purposes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  this  Act 
may  be  cited  as  the  "National  Weather  Modification  Policy  Act  of 
1976". 

SEC.  2.  DECLARATION  OF  POLICY. 

(a)  Findings. — The  Congress  finds  and  declares  the  following: 

(1)  Weather-related  disasters  and  hazards,  including 
drought,  hurricanes,  tornadoes,  hail,  lightning,  fog.  floods,  and 
frost,  result  in  substantial  human  suffering  and  loss  of  life, 
billions  of  dollars  of  annual  economic  losses  to  owners  of  crops 
and  other  property,  and  substantial  financial  loss  to  the 
United  States  Treasury ; 

(2)  Weather  modification  technology  has  significant  poten- 
tial for  preventing,  diverting,  moderating,  or  ameliorating  the 
adverse  effects  of  such  disasters  and  hazards  and  enhancing 
crop  production  and  the  availability  of  water ; 

(3)  The  interstate  nature  of  climatic  and  related  phenom- 
ena, the  severe  economic  hardships  experienced  as  the  result 
of  occasional  drought  and  other  adverse  meteorological  con- 
ditions, and  the  existing  role  and  responsibilities  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government  with  respect  to  disaster  relief,  require  appro- 
priate Federal  action  to  prevent  or  alleviate  such  disasters 
and  hazards ;  and 

(4)  Weather  modification  programs  may  have  long-range 
and  unexpected  effects  on  existing  climatic  patterns  which 
are  not  confined  by  national  boundaries. 

(b)  Purpose. — It  is  therefore  declared  to  be  the  purpose  of  the 
Congress  in  this  Act  to  develop  a  comprehensive  and  coordinated 
national  weather  modification  policy  and  a  national  program  of 
weather  modification  research  and  development — 

(1)  to  determine  the  means  by  which  deliberate  weather 
modification  can  be  used  at  the  present  time  to  decrease  the 
adverse  impact  of  weather  on  agriculture,  economic  growth, 
and  the  general  public  welfare,  and  to  determine  the  potential 
for  weather  modification ; 

(2)  to  conduct  research  into  those  scientific  areas  consid- 
ered most  likely  to  lead  to  practical  techniques  for  drought 
prevention,  or  alleviation  and  other  forms  of  deliberate 
weather  modification : 

(3)  to  develop  practical  methods  and  devices  for  weather 
modification : 

(4)  to  make  weather  modification  research  findings  avail- 
able to  interested  parties ; 

(5)  to  assess  the  economic,  social,  environmental,  and  legal 
impact  of  an  operational  weather  modification  program  ; 

(6)  to  develop  both  national  and  international  mechanisms 
designed  to  minimize  conflicts  which  may  arise  with  respect  to 
the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modification ;  and 

(7)  to  integrate  the  results  of  existing  experience  and 
studies  in  weather  modification  activities  into  model  codes 
and  agreements  for  regulation  of  domestic  and  international 
weather  modification  activities. 

SEC.  3.  DEFINITIONS. 

As  used  in  this  Art : 

(1)  The  term  ''Secretary"  means  the  Secretary  of  Commerce. 

(2)  The  term  "State"  means  any  State  of  the  United  States,  the 
District  of  Columbia,  or  any  Commonwealth,  territory,  or  posses- 
sion of  the  United  States. 


653 


(3)  The  term  "weather  modification"  means  any  activity  per- 
formed with  the  intention  and  expectation  of  producing  changes 
in  precipitation,  wind,  fog,  lightning,  and  other  atmospheric 
phenomena. 

SEC.  4.  STUDY. 

The  Secretary  shall  conduct  a  comprehensive  investigation  and  15  use  330 
study  of  the  state  of  scientific  knowledge  concerning  weather  note, 
modification,  the  present  state  of  development  of  weather  modifi- 
cation technology,  the  problems  impeding  effective  implementation 
of  weather  modification  technology,  and  other  related  matters. 
Such  study  shall  include — 

,(1)  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  present  and  past  research 
efforts  to  establish  practical  weather  modification  technology, 
particularly  as  it  relates  to  reducing  loss  of  life  and  crop  and 
property  destruction ; 

(2)  a  review  and  analysis  of  research  needs  in  weather 
modification  to  establish  areas  in  which  more  research  could 
be  expected  to  yield  the  greatest  return  in  terms  of  practical 
weather  modification  technology ; 

(3)  a  review  and  analysis  of  existing  studies  to  establish 
the  probable  economic  importance  to  the  United  States  in 
terms  of  agricultural  production,  energy,  and  related  economic 
factors  if  the  present  weather  modification  technology  were 
to  be  effectively  implemented ; 

(4)  an  assessment  of  the  legal,  social,  and  ecological  impli- 
cations of  expanded  and  effective  research  and  operational 
weather  modification  projects ; 

(5)  formulation  of  one  or  more  options  for  a  model  regula- 
tory code  for  domestic  weather  modification  activities,  such 
code  to  be  based  on  a  review  and  analysis  of  experience  and 
studies  in  this  area,  and  to  be  adaptable  to  State  and  national 
needs ; 

(6)  recommendations  concerning  legislation  desirable  at 
all  levels  of  government  to  implement  a  national  weather 
modification  policy  and  program ; 

(7)  a  review  of  the  international  importance  and  implica- 
tions of  weather  modification  activities  by  the  United  States ; 

(8)  a  review  and  analysis  of  present  and  past  funding  for 
weather  modification  from  all  sources  to  determine  the  sources 
and  adequacy  of  funding  in  the  light  of  the  needs  of  the 
Nation ; 

(9)  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  purpose,  policy,  methods, 
and  funding  of  the  Federal  departments  and  agencies  involved 
in  weather  modification  and  of  the  existing  interagency  coor- 
dination of  weather  modification  research  efforts ; 

(10)  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  necessity  and  feasibility 
of  negotiating  an  international  agreement  concerning  the 
peaceful  uses  of  weather  modification  ;  and 

(11)  formulation  of  one  or  more  options  for  a  model  inter- 
national agreement  concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather 
modification  and  the  regulation  of  national  weather  modifi- 
cation activities ;  and  a  review  and  analysis  of  the  necessity 
and  feasibility  of  negotiating  such  an  agreement. 

SEC.  5.  REPORT. 

(a)  In  General. — The  Secretary  shall  prepare  and  submit  to 
the  President  and  the  Congress,  within  1  year  after  the  date  of 
enactment  of  this  Act,  a  final  report  on  the  findings,  conclusions, 
and  recommendations  of  the  study  conducted  pursuant  to  section 
4.  Such  report  shall  include : 

(1)  a  summary  of  the  findings  made  with  respect  to  each 
of  the  areas  of  investigation  specified  in  section  4 ; 

(2)  other  findings  which  are  pertinent  to  the  determination 
and  implementation  of  a  national  policy  on  weather  modifi- 
cations ; 


Submittal  to 
President  and 
Congress. 
15  USC  330 
note. 


34-857  0  -  79  -  44 


654 


(3)  a  recommended  national  policy  on  weather  modifica- 
tion and  a  recommended  national  weather  modification  re- 
search and  development  program  which  is  consistent  with, 
and  likely  to  contribute  to,  achieving  the  objectives  of  such 
policy ; 

(4)  recommendations  for  levels  of  Federal  funding  suffi- 
cient to  support  adequately  a  national  weather  modification 
research  and  development  program  ; 

(5)  recommendations  for  any  changes  in  the  organization 
and  involvement  of  Federal  departments  and  agencies  in 
weather  modification  which  may  be  needed  to  implement  ef- 
fectively the  recommended  national  policy  on  weather  modi- 
fication and  the  recommended  research  and  development  pro- 
gram ;  and 

(6)  recommendations  for  any  regulatory  and  other  legisla- 
tion which  may  be  required  to  implement  such  policy  and  pro- 
gram or  for  any  international  agreement  which  may  be  ap- 
propriate concerning  the  peaceful  uses  of  weather  modifica- 
tion, including  recommendations  concerning  the  dissemina- 
tion, refinement,  and  possible  implementation  of  the  model 
domestic  code  and  international  agreement  developed  under 
the  specifications  of  section  4. 

Cooperation.  Each  department,  agency,  and  other  instrumentality  of  the  Fed- 
eral Government  is  authorized  and  directed  to  furnish  the  Secre- 
tary any  information  which  the  Secretary  deems  necessary  to 
carry  out  his  functions  under  this  Act. 

(b)  Operation  and  Consulation. — The  Secretary  shall  solicit 
and  consider  the  views  of  State  agencies,  private  firms,  institu- 
tions of  higher  learning,  and  other  interested  persons  and  govern- 
mental entities  in  the  conduct  of  the  study  required  by  section  4, 
and  in  the  preparation  of  the  report  required  by  subsection  (a). 

SEC.  6.  AUTHORIZATION  FOR  APPROPRIATIONS. 

15  use  330  (a)  There  is  authorized  to  be  appropriated  to  the  Secretary  for 

note-  the  purposes  of  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  Act  not  to  ex- 

ceed $1,000,000. 

(b)  Section  6  of  the  Act  entitled  "An  Act  to  provide  for  tlw 
reporting  of  weather  modification  activities  to  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment", approved  December  18,  1971  (85  Stat.  736  ;  88  Stat. 
1212;  15  U.S.C.  330e),  is  further  amended  by  striking  out  "1973. 
1974,  1975,  1976,  and  1977,"  and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof  "1073 
through  1980,". 

Approved  Oct.  13,  1976. 


655 


0)  O-Q  0"0 

o  2;  3  o  = 
S  o 

'I  £ 

o> 

0)  TO 


O*  co 

s=. 
as 

-o. 
oco  ■ 

CO 

So 


_  o>  E 
c£  ° 

TO  " 


>  a>  to  E-c 

■S  |2 

:  o  a>  >      &  to 


c  £  to  I 

£s«o§ 

1 


5-  ss 

.  o      o     o  .— 

-Cic-O-*^  .LTS-D 

o  am  "  "iw 

m  TO  <->  _  "O  „ 


5  o 

O  03 


o 

E  , 


o  <=> 


183 


)  j  >  aj  _3  to 
3     3-  <u  «  S 
c  ro  "-.5  a? 


O  3 

O  W  W  y)  0)  Q) 


■a  E 
S  E 

TO  g 
2  a> 


»u5 
E  g  «'„, 

*-es:5e  e 

llslil 

:  =  cc     22  3 


°.  o  To 
o  c  y 

So  g.t: 


E  ». 


<?  a?  Ej  co-tp^o. 
2  ±5  <"i5  X£  a> ~ 

c:  ^>  ■—  to  c_  a>  — 
oj  a>  >      ox  co-~. 

=  E  a  uju».  ».2? 


sI.e| 

2  to^  S 

=  is  2  =  <= 
°  2  =.2 
•  2  £  SIS 
£     2  E  •- 

CO  M  of— 

o  =  -o 

T3  ^  TO  O 

!w°o  co  5 

/■E15  £  US 
3.E»s|g 

»  CO  TO  S  2>  5 


:  5.5  S  5-£ 


III 

O  D- 


E  •-  5  "  " 
'  2  _Sj  o  E  « 

&o£  Q.O  =, 

E  §  £ 


:E  E 


Eq  g 
5 


■  E  2  a>±= 

!   O  TO 

!  5..S  I 


01 


:  to^.s  =  o 
I  E-tS™  2 

IIS  Bit:  o>  5 
.  o>  to  o>  >£ 


co  co 

CD  CD 


656 


«j        E  «° 

T3  ,>y=       *  a. 


"  2  «: 


%     b | go  s-S 


"     D03  0  O 

SE2-  E 


—  R  !2       -E     0  =  ro  2>  "<=>  ks 


c  o 

_  g  TO 

a>     J=  —  <u  £-  >      °  ">  _ ,£ 
H  c  a.  0,0  5  °-  o     «SS     Ecvj  ■• 

—  o  i-  h  "s  * 


5 

«2  o  5 


S  i° |5  «1  i  I  S^|.S  s|-§  g  ess g  >  -2  ,  e|.h| 
s*g  si  -  o  S       «  sl~"|ija.i  ifc§»l  i*2  8f|s2i.§|£ 


:  i  ee» 


E  E  o  <u  =         <?  <5  u  *i  -E         2  o  -  « 


Q.Q. 


CD 


oo  O 


657 


to  >  «->  •  c  oiwojis  ^  "-p  .'.ii; 
~E-=  3  2-5-*-     >  £  £5- EE 


S3  U  4^  X 


=       S  I  </>.^~  TOTS  »  C  oj  «o"fJ 

o  w  i.  o)  w  «  ><x:  <o 1  w  3  *5  s  o 
=  o  p»SiJa)2^Sa)*'k-'Ot  CD 


£  15  °..2 


a>  E 


5  & 


._  o      ,.  g  ai  j  u  ~p  Oc.E 


P.-£ 


:  o  = 

3  cn  


J  ^ 

a>    op  So 

■e  c 


|-.llis 

D.  O  O-  «  O  T3  ■. 


(5»oooE 

E  JE 3Z  E 

Q  c  O  «  U  U 

I^E£-5£ 


J  3d  8*  E§ 

£  a>  ■*  -S  «.  "1 

<_>'"•—««'  J3to 

a>  „, fa*  efa» 

=  S  S-g  .=  z 
»     —  q.°2  £  5 

•  *JC  3.2 
C       =  2c® 

.is  2 

O  O  SO  OJk.  15  0)  ™ 
Q  Q  o  O  O  0>  CL00  « 
DV>Q.O  <D  QJ  -Q 


S<£S5.g 
to  .-5  >  *-<x> 
«^*E  o  «  =ir> 

c  ojzf  I*- 

■o  K  _  a>  = 
2  S  i  ='JE.§ 

I  §  2-°-° 


_3 

o      So ' 


w  c  -J  T3  (O  (X 

a)  •  Si  <» 

ro.-t;  p  E-<=  o>  . 
E  =  E  "J 


oESS 

Q.  u  oj  <1> 


„,  c  a> 
.c.2"<=>  c 


E    o  £ 

CO      01-  — 

o  m" 

a.    !S  «  o 

.2  coo  5 

3-2  gS| 

iSsif 

,w.S-E£^ 

"sis- 

o>  te    •»  * 

—  £  «  Ch-I 
WOO 

O  (D  0) 


il 

2i  o 


E  -  i 

«  v> 

—  <u  ■ 


r 


»r0 

5  His 

.  re  oj  c 


>  o  >  oo  33  ,~ 
1  r»»      1—  aj  ro  _. 


^  CO 


.  o 


S  ^3 


"'coco 
<a  «  v> 


OO-H 

CO  CO  CO 


co 

2      co  ^2-1 


s 

6  J 


658 


TO  QJ  TO 

£  E  1.1  %  *  i 

>=  58  «  5.E 


oooooo 
o  o  o  o  o  o 


o  — o  o : 


T3  WD 


ooooo 
o'pifliooo  _  . 

oir>r~r~-ooro     >o>  gi-infl  o 

r  O  J  .  ,  u-     -31  o     —  "  t;  t 

W  _  n  r    _ —  -n  <^T3  n 


E 


03  O 

E  2£  «= 

is  -° 

3T3 


—  ^  =  03 

a>  3  c 


J  o 

«2  Q-o  S  *J 


03  03  O  g 
$  0  0  0) 

O  «J-*  > 

Sill 


a.  >-  _re  •  -    s  B  i_  z  « 

TO  O 


- 

<Q  03  03 

2-=-o'o 


\oE  S 


03  TO  m  — 


03  O  c 

Nine- 
s'0.2  E^S^™ 

03  03  •  •  5 


■S  2  „  c  o-w  o.E  ®-a 
o  SS'-S  «  =  «*  Ez  5     ™_  - 

a„  a)  m  c  c  "  °  M,;     u  w  PTr-.      oe  !=  c\j  * 


°  O  >-  O  i_ 


^  wr  o3 .c  2  03 £-5;  E  >  03  03  o.  re 

S  ^c^'Sf^o  ° 2  03  «>  E^  22  g 


e  .£  o  -  - 
jwzszui.:  o  E 
£  E=> 


-      .2  03  £  re  .rj 

E  »T5<75  o-a-K-i: 


-E  < 
■E  5 

!  M 


Q.  < 
<  _ 

< 

O 


659 


<u  e  £  £? 


■  M_  E  * 
c-o  oj  S 

Li||j 

:  — =  1—  o 

:  o  a)  c  ». 

>  —  -O  CD  o 

rS  _  E  a) 
i  ■     <d  E 

■  "a  E  x  t 
,  d>  a)  a>  o 
>-a  E  Q 

;  a.  c  2.1= 

■  £  E  GL  C 

.re  o  — 
>-=  j-  o  — 


.2_=  a>  2 
«  2  2  =  o 

5.    -a  -S  _2 

«  <u  * 
<5*-  o  o.2 

>  TO  <J  Z 
■        ,/)T3  « 
V,  oj  q>.C 

2.215:2  & 


5  S 

E  ^x. 

a  «§ 

g  go. 

g  O_so 


°ir>.er 
. .  co" 


E  2  —  c 

E  w°-i 


"  nr  ■ 

=  S-*-  a) 

w  fo  c  </> 

»  U—  TO 

3  r-  ~°  2- 


•  I 

I  Q3 


s^p  it: 

574  •  e  E  w  52 

S?  M—     -o  _o  c 
"  <2  o  .£.£ 
—  —      re  to  -a 

8l||.§i£ 
<£  =  E  ~=>  •> "?  • - 

o  o  8=?»3 
o      a>  «  =_  <- 

"3-  S        O  c  o  ™ 

-  to  53  to  •— ,  5 
-E3  o  _J2  =±= 


O  c 


._     .c  a>  a>  o 


»_  =  o  cn  b,  to 
r-     o;  a>  a>  i_ 

o  £  °_2  El 


'  >>       TO  O  p 


SSEgils 


•  o  o 
o  «o 

^.0  0  >N 


TO  *"  CO       •  — 


o"  o  2  2 

U0  *f  OaO  Q.  0J 
0O  O  O  > 

os'g  C  "to 

£  o.2  £ 
g^2& 

nil  a- 

TO  O  •  TO  o 


Q>*;  •»  >v^J=T3  >r  0>  0> 

.c  E  .t;  =  oe-—  c  v^jz 


to      «  « 

=  MM 
oe       TO  TO 


i.C  <n-0H-"^:°TO  C'  •  "D 

!■£  g  5  £  2  • 

If  2tt^-g2b.£gJ 
C  §s  53 if  .2  Q.0.2J.-0  2 

2-^      2-^  TO  T3  0>  2  C  Q) 

^7§.^5:^TO>-gS5  2^  =  rea|« 
I  MS-P.ia>S^Wa>0&Ea,«r 


TOgiS^  £ 
3        c  >_  ro 


T y       ^  ^  to' 


Q.O  >  <= 

*2  §  £ 


ili 


ii2~s^^: 

..-nE3 
TO««.^Sa'2^i' 

^  to  ^  v>  a>  <d 

•s  §51  S  2£i^o  » 


•— 1 1— i  co  uo  r~ 

coco4-«i-^i- 
o>  o~>  o~)  o~i  cn 


J>|        OO)  LO 

oo     OO  oo  s 


cr     cc  o:  cc 


C  =  =  C  = 

a>  o  o  a>  o 


lt>  m  to  to  to 
2     oo  er>  a>  tD  en 


TO  ">  O 

c  2  Q. 
a>  o 


2      2  25^2^2 


So  22 


>-~2  o  ci 


Appendix  K 


Membership  and  Charter  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board 

Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board 

Mr.  Harlan  Cleveland,  Chairman,  Director,  Program  in  International  Affairs. 
Aspen  Institute  for  Humanistic  Studies,  P.O.  Box  2820,  Rosedale  Rd.,  Prince- 
ton, N.J.  08540. 

Dr.  D.  Ray  Booker,  President,  Aeromet,  Inc.,  P.O.  Box  FF,  Norman,  OK  73070. 
Dr.  Roscoe  R.  Braham,  Jr.,  Director,  Cloud  Physics  Laboratory,  University  of 

Chicago,  Chicago,  Illinois  60637. 
Mr.  Stanley  A.  Changnon,  Jr.,  Head,  Atmospheric  Science  Section,  Illinois  State 

Water  Survey,  Box  232,  Champaign-Urbana,  Illinois  61801. 
Mr.  Abram  Chayes,  Professor  of  Law,  Harvard  Law  School,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

02138. 

Dr.  John  P.  Craven,  Dean  of  Marine  Programs,  University  of  Hawaii,  2540 

Maile  Way,  Honolulu,  Hawaii  96822. 
Dr.  James  A.  Crutchfield,  Jr.,  Professor  of  Economics.  Department  of  Economics, 

University  of  Washington,  Seattle,  Washington  98105. 
Mr.  Robert  D.  Elliott,  President,  North  American  Weather  Consultants,  Inc., 

Goleta,  California  93017. 
Dr.  John  W.  Firor.  Director,  National  Center  for  Atmospheric  Research,  P.O. 

Box  1470,  Boulder,  Colorado  80302. 
Dr.  T.  Keith  Glennan,  11483  Waterview,  Reston,  VA  22070. 

Mr.  Thomas  L.  Kimball.  Executive  Vice  President,  National  Wildlife  Federa- 
tion, 1412  16th  Street,  Washington,  D.C.  20036. 

Dr.  Thomas  F.  Malone,  Director,  Holcomb  Research  Institute,  Butler  University, 
Indianapolis,  Indiana  46208. 

Ms.  Martha  A.  Mclnnis,  President,  Enviro  South,  Inc.,  3815  Interstate  Court, 
Suite  202,  Montgomery.  Alabama  36109. 

Mr.  Herman  Pollack,  Research  Professor,  International  Affairs,  Room  714 
Library,  George  Washington  University,  Washington,  D.C.  20052. 

Mr.  Wallace  N.  Robinson,  III,  Chairman,  Western  Kansas  Groundwater  Manage- 
ment District  No.  1,  Federal  Building,  Scott  City,  KA  67871. 

Dr.  Joanne  Simpson,  Professor  of  Environmental  Sciences,  Center  for  Ad- 
vanced Studies.  University  of  Virginia,  Charlottesville,  VA  22903. 

Mr.  S.  Bryce  Streibel,  Fessenden,  North  Dakota  58438. 

U.S.  Department  of  Commerce — Charter  of  Weather  Modification  Advisory 

Board 

a.  establishment 

The  Secretary  of  Commerce  (the  "Secretary"),  having  determined  that  it 
is  in  the  public  interest  in  connection  with  the  performance  of  duties  imposed 
on  the  Secretary  by  Public  Law  94-490  (the  "Act"),  hereby  establishes  the 
Weather  Modification  Advisory  Board  (the  "Board")  pursuant  to  the  Federal 
Advisory  Committee  Act,  5  U.S.C  App.  I  ( Supp  V,  1975) . 

B.  EXPLANATION  OF  TERMS 

The  terms  used  in  this  Charter  shall  have  the  meanings  that  are  prescribed 
in  the  Act. 

C.  OBJECTIVES  AND  DUTIES 

1.  The  Board  shall  advise  and  make  recommendations  to  the  Secretary  through 
the  Administrator  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (the 
"Administrator")  on  matters  of  a  national  policy,  a  national  research  and  de- 
velopment program,  and  other  aspects  of  weather  modification  as  outlined  in 
the  Act. 


(660) 


661 


2.  The  Board  may  draw  upon  the  experience  and  expertise  of  its  members 
upon  the  public,  and  upon  other  bodies  and  individuals  deemed  necessary  to 
provide  advice,  consultation,  evaluations,  and  recommendations  to  the  Secre- 
tary on  the  various  weather  modification  matters  relative  to  Sections  4  and  5  of 
the  Act,  such  as :  a.  The  present  state  of  scientific  knowledge  of  weather  modi- 
fication, its  development,  and  technology;  b.  The  problems  impeding  effective 
implementation  of  weather  modification  technology ;  c.  Research  needs  in 
weather  modification  and  the  economic  importance  of  weather  modification; 
d.  An  assessment  of  the  legal,  social,  and  ecological  implications  of  weather  modi- 
fications ;  e.  Development  of  model  domestic  regulatory  codes ;  f .  International 
implications  and  model  agreements;  g.  A  comprehensive  and  coordinated  na- 
tional weather  modification  policy ;  h.  A  national  program  of  weather  modifica- 
tion research  and  development ;  and  i.  Legislation  and  funding  associated  with 
such  policy  and  program.  The  Board  shall  submit  its  report  to  the  Secretary  not 
less  than  15  days  prior  to  the  date  the  Secretary  is  required  to  submit  the 
report  to  the  President  and  the  Congress. 

3.  The  Board  functions  solely  as  an  advisory  body,  and  will  comply  fully 
with  the  provisions  of  the  Federal  Advisory  Committee  Act. 

D.  MEMBERS  AND  CHAIRPERSON 

1.  The  Board  shall  consist  of  not  more  than  25  members  and  not  less  than 
7,  appointed  by  the  Secretary.  The  members  shall  possess  expertise,  experience, 
or  current  interest  in  one  or  more  weather  modification  factors  or  related  aspects 
such  as :  research,  operations,  agriculture,  water  resources,  economics,  law,  gov- 
ernment, business,  social  and  environmental  impact,  and  international  relations. 
Members  shall  be  appointed  for  up  to  2  years  and  will  serve  at  the  discretion 
of  the  Secretary.  Appointments  to  fill  vacancies  shall  be  for  the  remainder  of 
the  unexpired  term  of  the  vacancy. 

2.  The  Chairperson  of  the  Board  shall  be  a  nonfederal  member  and  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  Secretary  from  among  the  membership. 

E.  ADMINISTRATIVE  PROVISIONS 

1.  The  Board  shall  report  to  the  Secretary  through  the  Administrator. 

2.  The  Board  shall  have  an  Executive  Secretary  who  shall  be  a  full-time  Fed- 
eral officer  or  employee  designated  by  the  Administrator. 

3.  The  Board  generally  shall  meet  quarterly  and  at  such  other  times  as  may  be 
deemed  necessary  by  the  Administrator  or  the  Executive  Secretary. 

4.  The  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  shall  provide  clerical 
and  other  necessary  support. 

5.  The  annual  cost  of  operating  the  Board  is  estimated  at  $160,000.  This  in- 
cludes 2  person-years  of  staff  support. 

6.  The  Board  may  establish,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  the  Department  of 
Commerce  Committee  Management  Handbook  (II,  I.E.),  and  the  approval  of  the 
Administrator,  an  Executive  Committee  and  such  subcommittees  or  working 
groups  of  its  members  as  may  be  necessary. 

7.  Members  of  the  Board  will  be  compensated  as  consultants  for  time  spent 
attending  Board  meetings  during  any  month  in  which  the  Board  meets  for  more 
than  one  day.  They  will,  upon  request,  be  allowed  travel  expenses  as  authorized 
by  5  U.S.C.  5703. 

F.  DURATION 

The  Board  shall  terminate  2  years  after  its  establishment  unless  it  is  earlier 
terminated  or  renewed  by  proper  authority  by  appropriate  action. 
January  18,  1977.  Joseph  E.  Kasputy 

Assistant  Secretary  for  Administration 

Pursuant  to  subsection  9(c)  of  the  Federal  Advisory  Committee  Act,  5  U.S.C. 
App.  1,  this  charter  was  filed  with  the  Assistant  Secretary  for  Administration  on 
January  18,  1977.  On  the  same  date,  copies  were  filed  with  the  Committees  listed 
below,  and  a  copy  was  furnished  the  Library  of  Congress. 

Senate  Committee  on  Commerce. 

House  Committee  on  Interstate  and  Foreign  Commerce. 

House  Committee  on  Merchant  Marine  and  Fisheries. 

January  24,  1977.  Robert  T.  Jordan,  Chief, 

Information  Management  Division,  Office  of 

Organization  and  Management  Systems. 


Appendix  L 


Rules  and  Regulations  and  Required  Forms  for  Submitting  In- 
formation on  Weather  Modification  Activities  to  the  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  U.S.  Department  of 
Commerce,  in  Accordance  with  Requirements  of  Public  Law 
92-205 

Chapter  IX — National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration, 
Department  of  Commerce 

subchapter  a — general  regulations 

part  908  maintaining  records  and  submitting  reports  on  weather 

modification  activities 

In  a  notice  published  in  the  Federal  Register  of  February  24,  1976  (41  FR 
3064),  the  Administrator  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administra- 
tion proposed  to  amend  the  rules  on  maintaining  records  and  submitting  reports 
on  weather  modification  activities  (37  FR  22974  and  39  FR  1832) .  Interested  per- 
sons were  given  until  March  25,  1976  to  submit  written  views,  objections,  recom- 
mendations, or  suggestions  in  connection  with  the  proposed  amendments.  The 
few  comments  received  in  response  to  the  notice  have  been  considered  in  detail, 
and,  as  a  result,  some  revisions  have  been  made  in  these  amendments. 

The  first  revision  covers  §  908.3(d),  the  amendment  that  allows  the  Adminis- 
trator to  waive  some  requirements  in  the  reporting  of  certain  weather  modifica- 
tion attempts.  This  amendment  has  been  clarified  to  provide  specifically  that  all 
weather  modification  activities  are  to  be  reported  to  NOAA,  that  the  Administra- 
tor may  decide  to  waive  some  subsequent  reporting  requirements  for  certain  ac- 
tivities after  initial  notification,  and  that  the  basis  for  such  decision  will  be  the 
general  acceptability,  from  a  technical  or  scientific  viewpoint,  of  the  apparatus 
and  techniques  to  be  used. 

The  second  revision  concerns  the  period  for  filing  interim  and  final  reports. 
Sections  908.5(a)  and  908.6  now  provide  for  such  reports  to  be  filed  within  45 
days,  since  some  respondents  stated  that  they  would  encounter  difficulty  in  meet- 
ing a  30  day  requirement. 

The  final  revision  is  in  §  908.5(a),  with  respect  to  the  effective  closing  date  for 
the  interim  report  period.  In  reconsidering  this  amendment,  NOAA  has  decided 
to  adopt  January  1  as  the  closing  date  for  the  interim  report  in  order  to  avoid 
ambiguity  and  to  prepare  summary  reports  that  more  accurately  reflect  the 
status  of  weather  modification  activities  during  a  calendar  year. 

The  original  rules  on  maintaining  records  and  submitting  reports  on  weather 
modification  activities  were  published  in  the  Federal  Register  (37  FR  22974). 
These  rules  were  subsequently  amended  (39  FR  1832).  For  completeness,  the  re- 
visions mentioned  above  and  the  remainder  of  the  amendments  now  being  effected 
are  summarized  as  follows : 

1.  Section  908.1  (k)  and  (1)  have  been  added  to  define  sponsor  and  operator. 

2.  The  last  sentence  in  §  908.3  (c)  has  been  restated. 

3.  Section  908.3  (d)  and  (e)  have  been  added. 

4.  Section  908.4(a)  has  been  revised. 

5.  Section  908.5(a)  has  been  changed. 

6.  Section  908.5(b)  (2)  has  been  reworded. 

7.  Section  908.6  has  been  changed. 

8.  Section  908.6(c)  has  been  changed. 

9.  Section  906.8(a)  (1)  (viii)  has  been  reworded. 

10.  Section  908.8(a)  (2)  has  been  reworded. 

The  purpose  of  these  rules  is  to  provide  for  the  reporting  to  the  Administrator 
of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  U.S.  Department  of 

(662) 


663 


Commerce,  of  weather  modification  activities  taking  place  within  the  United 
States,  pursuant  to  the  requirements  of  Pub.  Law  92-205  as  amended.  The  Sec- 
retary of  Commerce  (and  by  delegation  the  Administrator)  is  charged  under  the 
above  law  with  the  responsibility  to  assemble  and  retain  records  of  such  weather 
modification  activities,  to  make  these  records  publicly  available  to  the  fullest  ex- 
tent practicable,  and  to  publish  summaries  thereof  from  time  to  time.  The  intent 
of  this  program  is  that  expertise  in  the  field  of  weather  modification  will  be  in- 
creased ;  that  scientists  and  other  concerned  persons  will  have  access  to  in- 
formation about  past  and  ongoing  efforts  toward  weather  modification  ;  that  con- 
cerned persons  can  determine  whether  their  activities  will  be  necessary  or  dupli- 
cative, can  check  both  desirable  and  undesirable  atmospheric  changes  against 
records  of  weather  modification,  and  can  be  alert  to  possible  territorial  over- 
lappings  of  weather  modification  operations.  In  addition,  this  reporting  program 
provides  information  on  the  possibility  of  harm  to  persons,  property,  or  the  en- 
vironment, or  of  interference  with  Federal  research  projects. 

Appropriate  Federal  agencies  also  report  their  weather  modification  activities 
to  the  Secretary  of  Commerce.  This  Federal  reporting  complements  the  reporting 
of  non-Federally  sponsored  projects  and  provides  for  a  central  source  of  informa- 
tion on  all  weather  modification  activities  in  the  United  States. 

The  actions  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  under  these  rules  are  not  intended 
as,  nor  do  they  constitute,  control  or  regulation  of  weather  modification  opera- 
tions. Any  notification  that  may  be  made  to  operators  and  State  officials  on  the 
basis  of  information  received  will  be  advisory  only. 

Therefore,  pursuant  to  the  authority  contained  in  15  U.S.C.  330-330e  and  15 
U.S.C.  313,  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA)  has 
amended  Title  15,  Code  of  Federal  Regulations  by  the  addition  of  Part  908.  These 
rules  are  administered  by  the  Administrator,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric 
Administration,  on  behalf  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce,  pursuant  to  the  Secre- 
tary's delegation  of  authority  in  section  3  subparagraph  .Olt  of  U.S.  Department 
of  Commerce  Organization  Order  25-5A.  The  current  rules,  including  all  amend- 
ments, are  republished  below  in  their  entirety. 

Robert  M.  White, 

Administrator. 

June  4,  1976. 

Part  908  reads  as  follows  : 

Sec. 

908.1  Definitions. 

905.2  Persons  subject  to  reporting. 

908.3  Activities  subject  to  reporting. 

908.4  Initial  report. 

908.5  Interim  reports. 

908.6  Final  report. 

908.7  Supplemental  reports. 

908.8  Maintenance  of  records. 

908.9  Retention  of  records. 

908.10  Penalties. 

908.11  Maintenance  of  record  of  related  activities. 

908.12  Public  disclosure  of  information. 

908.13  Address  of  letters. 

908.14  Business  to  be  transacted  in  writing. 

908.15  Times  for  taking  action  :  expiration  on  Saturday,  Sunday,  or  holiday. 

908.16  Signature. 

908.17  Suspension  or  waiver  of  rules. 

908.18  Matters  not  specifically  provided  for  in  rules. 

908.19  Publication  of  notice  of  proposed  amendments. 

908.20  Effective  date. 

908.21  Report  form. 

Authority  :  Pub.  L.  92-305,  85  Stat.  735,  December  18,  1971. 
§  908.1  Definitions 

As  used  in  this  part,  terms  shall  have  the  meaning  ascribed  in  this  section. 

(a)  Administrator.  The  Administrator  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmos- 
pheric Administration. 

(b)  Person.  Any  individual,  corporation,  company,  association,  firm,  partner- 
ship, society,  joint  stock  company,  any  State  or  local  government  or  any  agency 
thereof,  or  any  other  organization,  whether  commercial  or  nonprofit,  except 
where  acting  solely  as  an  employee,  agent,  or  independent  contractor  of  the 
Federal  Government. 

(c)  Weather  modification  activity.  Any  activity  performed  with  the  intention 
of  producing  artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics  of  the 
atmosphere. 


664 


(d)  United  States.  The  several  States,  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  Common- 
wealth of  Puerto  Rico,  and  any  territory  or  insular  possession  of  the  United 
States. 

(e)  Persons  whose  activities  relate  to  weather  modification.  Persons  engaged 
in  weather  modification  activities  or  engaged  in  the  distribution  or  sale  of 
weather  modification  apparatus  or  materials  known  by  them  to  be  destined  for 
use  in  weather  modification  activities. 

(f )  Project.  A  related  series  of  weather  modification  activities  having  a  com- 
mon objective. 

(g)  Modification  mission.  One  or  more  airborne  weather  modification  activities 
intended  to  affect  the  same  target  area,  or  one  or  more  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities carried  out  by  items  of  ground-based  weather  modification  apparatus 
intended  to  affect  the  same  target  area.  For  purposes  of  these  rules,  activities  that 
extend  beyond  1  calendar  day  shall  constitute  a  separate  mission  for  each  day 
that  they  continue. 

(h)  Target  area.  The  ground  area  within  which  the  effects  of  the  weather 
modification  activity  are  expected  to  be  found. 

(i)  Control  area.  A  preselected,  untreated  ground  area  used  for  comparison 
with  a  target  area. 

(j)  Weather  modification  apparatus.  Any  apparatus  used  with  the  intention  of 
producing  artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics  of  the 
atmosphere.  For  example:  Seeding  generators,  propane  devices,  flares,  rockets, 
artillery  projectiles,  jet  engines,  etc. 

(k)  Sponsor.  The  primary  person  for  whom  the  weather  modification  activity 
is  performed. 

(1)  Operator.  The  person  who  is  primarily  responsible  for  carrying  out  the 
weather  modification  activity. 

§  908.2  Persons  subject  to  reporting 

Any  person  engaged  or  intending  to  engage  in  any  weather  modification  ac« 
tivity  in  the  United  States  shall  be  subject  to  the  reporting  provisions  of  this  part. 

§  908.3  Activities  subject  to  reporting 

(a)  The  following,  when  conducted  as  weather  modification  activities,  shall 
be  subject  to  reporting  : 

(1)  Seeding  or  dispersing  of  any  substance  into  clouds  or  fog,  to  alter  drop 
size  distribution,  produce  ice  crystals  or  coagulation  of  droplets,  alter  the 
development  of  hail  or  lightning,  or  influence  in  any  way  the  natural  develop- 
ment cycle  of  clouds  or  their  environment ; 

(2)  Using  fires  or  heat  sources  to  influence  convective  circulation  or  to 
evaporate  fog. 

(3)  Modifying  the  solar  radiation  exchange  of  the  earth  or  clouds,  through 
the  release  of  gases,  dusts,  liquids,  or  aerosols  into  the  atmosphere ; 

(4)  Modifying  the  characteristics  of  land  or  water  surfaces  by  dusting  or 
treating  with  powders,  liquid  sprays,  dyes,  or  other  materials ; 

(5)  Releasing  electrically  charged  or  radioactive  particles,  or  ions,  into 
the  atmosphere; 

(6)  Applying  shock  waves,  sonic  energy  sources,  or  other  explosive  or 
acoustic  sources  to  the  atmosphere ; 

(7)  Using  aircraft  propeller  downwash,  jet  wash,  or  other  sources  of 
artificial  wind  generation ;  or 

(8)  Using  lasers  or  other  sources  of  electromagnetic  radiation. 

(b)  In  addition  to  the  activities  listed  above,  other  similar  activities  falling 
within  the  definition  of  weather  modification  as  set  forth  in  §  908.1  are  also 
subject  to  reporting. 

(c)  The  requirement  for  reporting  shall  not  apply  to  activities  of  a  purely  local 
nature  that  can  reasonably  be  expected  not  to  modify  the  weather  outside  of  the 
area  of  operation.  This  exception  is  presently  restricted  to  the  use  of  lightning 
deflection  or  static  discharge  devices  in  aircraft,  boats,  or  buildings,  and  to  the 
use  of  small  heat  sources,  fans,  fogging  devices,  aircraft  downwash,  or  sprays  to 
prevent  the  occurrence  of  frost  in  tracts  or  fields  planted  with  crops  susceptible 
to  frost  or  freeze  damage.  Also  expected  from  the  requirement  for  reporting  are 
religious  activities  or  other  ceremonies,  rites  and  rituals  intended  to  modify  the 
weather. 

(d)  All  activities  noted  in  §§  908.3(a)  and  (b)  are  subject  to  initial  reporting. 
However,  after  the  Administrator  has  received  initial  notification  of  a  planned 
activity,  he  may  waive  some  of  the  subsequent  reporting  requirements.  This  de- 


665 


cision  to  waive  certain  reporting  requirements  will  be  based  on  the  general  ac- 
ceptability, from  a  technical  or  scientific  viewpoint,  of  the  apparatus  and  tech- 
niques to  be  used. 

(e)  Other  reporting  exceptions  may  be  made  in  the  future  by  rule  of  the 
Administrator. 

§  90S4  Initial  report 

(a)  Any  person  intending  to  engage  in  any  weather  modification  project  or 
activity  in  the  United  States  shall  provide  a  report  of  his  intention,  to  be 
received  by  the  Administrator  at  least  10  days  before  the  commencement  of  such 
project  or  activity.  This  report  shall  contain  at  least  the  following : 

(1)  The  designation,  if  any,  used  by  the  operator  for  the  project  or 
activity ; 

(2)  The  following  dates  for  weather  modification  activities : 

(i)  The  date  the  first  actual  weather  modification  activity  is  to  be 
undertaken ; 

(ii)  The  date  on  which  the  final  modification  activity  is  expected  to 
occur ; 

(3)  The  following  information  on  persons  involved  with  the  project  or 
activity : 

(i)  The  name,  affiliation,  and  address  of  the  sponsor ; 

(ii)  The  name,  affiliation,  and  address  of  the  operator ; 

(4)  The  purpose  of  the  project  or  activity ; 

(5)  A  map  showing  the  approximate  size  and  location  of  the  target  and 
*  control  areas,  and  the  location  of  each  item  of  ground-based  weather  modifi- 
cation apparatus,  precipitation  measuring  device,  and,  for  airborne  opera- 
tions, the  airport ; 

(6)  A  description  of  the  weather  modification  apparatus,  modification 
agents,  and  the  techniques  to  be  empolyed ; 

(7)  The  name  and  address  of  the  responsible  individual  from  whom  log 
books  or  other  records  of  the  project  or  activity  may  be  obtained ; 

(8)  Answers  to  the  following  questions  on  project  safeguards : 

(i)  Has  an  Environmental  Impact  Statement,  Federal  or  State,  been 
filed :  Yes  No  If  Yes,  please  furnish  a  copy  as  applicable. 

(ii)  Have  provisions  been  made  to  acquire  the  latest  forecasts,  ad- 
visories, warnings,  etc.  of  the  National  Weather  Service,  Forest  Service, 

or  others  when  issued  prior  to  and  during  operations?  Yes  No  

If  Yes,  please  specify  on  a  separate  sheet. 

(ii)  Have  any  safety  procedures  (operational  constraints,  provisions 
for  suspension  of  operations,  monitoring  methods,  etc. )  and  any  environ- 
mental guidelines  (related  to  the  possible  effects  of  the  operations)  been 

included  in  the  operational  plans?  Yes  No   If  Yes,  please 

furnish  copies  or  a  description  of  the  specific  procedures  and  guidelines ; 
and 

(9)  Optional  remarks,  to  include  any  additional  items  which  the  person 
deems  significant  or  of  interest  and  such  other  information  as  the  Admini- 
strator may  request  the  person  to  submit. 

(b)  If  circumstances  prevent  the  signing  of  a  contract  or  agreement  to  per- 
form, or  receipt  of  an  authorization  to  proceed  with,  a  weather  modification 
activity  at  a  date  early  enough  to  comply  with  paragraph  (a)  of  this  section,  the 
initial  report  shall  be  provided  so  as  to  be  received  by  the  Administrator  within 
10  days  of  the  date  of  signing  of  the  contract  or  agreement,  or  receipt  of  authori- 
zation to  proceed.  In  such  cases,  the  report  shall  be  accompanied  by  an  explana- 
tion as  to  why  it  was  not  submitted  at  least  10  days  prior  to  the  commencement 
of  the  activity. 

(c)  In  the  event  that  circumstances  beyond  the  control  of  the  person  liable  to 
report  under  these  regulations  prevent  the  submission  of  the  initial  report  in  a 
timely  manner  as  described  above,  the  report  shall  be  forwarded  as  early  as 
possible,  accompanied  by  an  explanation  as  to  why  a  timely  report  has  not  been 
provided.  If  such  explanation  is  deemed  adequate,  the  Administrator  will  con- 
sider the  report  as  timely  filed. 

§  908.5  Interim  reports 

(a)  Any  person  engaged  in  a  weather  modification  project  or  activity  in  the 
United  States  on  January  1  in  any  year  shall  submit  to  the  Administrator,  not 
later  than  45  days  thereafter,  an  interim  report  setting  forth  as  of  such  date  the 
information  required  below  with  respect  to  any  such  continuing  project  or  ac- 


666 


tivity  not  previously  furnished  to  the  Administrator  in  a  prior  interim  report; 
provided  that  the  January  1  date  shall  not  apply  if  other  arrangements  have 
previously  been  made  with  the  written  approval  of  the  Administrator. 

(b)  The  interim  report  shall  include  the  file  number  assigned  by  the  Admini- 
strator and  shall  provide  a  summary  of  the  project  or  activity  containing  at  least 
the  following  information  for  each  month  : 

(1)  Number  of  days  on  which  actual  modification  activities  took  place; 

(2)  Number  of  days  on  which  weather  modification  activities  were  con- 
ducted, segregated  by  each  of  the  major  purposes  of  the  activities ; 

(3)  Number  of  modification  missions  that  were  carried  out ; 

(4)  Total  number  of  hours  of  operation  of  each  type  of  weather  modifica- 
tion apparatus  (i.e.,  net  hours  of  agent  release)  ; 

(5)  Total  amount  of  agent  used.  If  more  than  one  agent  was  used,  each 
should  be  totaled  separately  (e.g.,  carbon  dioxide,  sodium  chloride,  urea, 
silver  iodide). 

(c)  The  totals  for  the  items  in  paragraph  (b)  of  this  section  shall  be  provided 
for  the  period  covered  by  the  interim  report. 

§908.6  Final  report 

Upon  completion  of  a  weather  modification  project  or  activity  the  person  who 
performed  the  same  shall  submit  a  report  to  the  Administrator  not  later  than  45 
days  after  completion  of  the  project  or  activity.  The  report  shall  include  the  file 
number  assigned  by  the  Administrator  and  the  following  items  : 

(a)  Information  required  for  the  interim  reports  (to  the  extent  not  previously 
reported ) . 

(b)  The  total  number  of  days  on  which  actual  modification  activities  took 
place  during  the  project  or  activity. 

(c)  The  total  number  of  days  during  the  project  or  activity  on  which  weather 
modification  activities  were  conducted,  segregated  by  each  of  the  major  purposes 
of  the  activities. 

(d)  The  total  number  of  modification  missions  that  were  carried  out  under  the 
project  or  activity. 

(e)  The  total  number  of  hours  of  operation  of  each  type  of  weather  modification 
apparatus  during  the  project  or  activity  (i.e.,  net  hours  of  agent  release). 

(f)  The  total  amount  of  modification  agent (s)  dispensed  during  the  project  or 
activity.  If  more  than  one  agent  was  used,  each  should  be  be  totaled  separately 
(e.g.,  carbon  dioxide,  sodium  chloride,  urea,  silver  iodide). 

(g)  The  date  on  which  the  final  weather  modification  activity  occurred. 

§  908.7    Supplemental  reports 

Notwithstanding  other  regulations,  a  supplemental  report  in  letter  form  re- 
ferring to  the  appropriate  NOAA  file  number,  if  assigned,  must  be  made  to  the 
Administrator  immediately  if  any  report  of  weather  modification  activities  sub- 
mitted under  §  908.4,  §  908.5,  or  §  908.6  is  found  to  contain  any  material  inac- 
curacies, misstatements,  and  omissions.  A  supplemental  report  must  also  be  made 
if  there  are  changes  in  plans  for  the  project  or  activity. 

§  908.8  Maintenance  of  records 

(a)  Any  person  engaging  in  a  weather  modification  activity  in  the  United 
States  shall  maintain  a  record  of  such  activity.  This  record  shall  contain  at  least 
the  following,  when  applicable : 

(1)  A  chronological  record  of  activities  carried  on,  preferably  in  the  form 
of  a  daily  log,  which  shall  include  the  NOAA  file  number  assigned  to  the  pro- 
ject, the  designation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus,  and  at 
least  the  following  information  for  each  unit : 

(i )  Date  of  the  weather  modification  activity. 

(ii)  Position  of  each  aircraft  or  location  of  each  item  of  weather  modi- 
fication apparatus  during  each  modification  mission.  Maps  may  be  used. 

(iii)  Time  when  weather  modification  activity  began  and  ended. 

(iv)  Total  duration  of  operation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification 
apparatus  (i.e.,  net  hours  of  agent  release). 

( v )  Type  of  each  modification  agent  used. 

(vi)  Rate  of  dispersal  of  each  agent  during  the  period  of  actual  opera- 
tion of  weather  modification  apparatus. 

(vii)  Total  amount  of  agent  used.  If  more  than  one  agent  was  used, 
report  total  for  each  type  separately. 

(viii)  Number  of  days  on  which  weather  modification  activities  were 
conducted,  segregated  by  each  of  the  major  purposes  of  the  activities. 


667 


(2)  The  monthly  totals  of  hours  of  modification  activity,  the  amount  of 
modification  agent  used,  and  the  number  of  days  on  which  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  were  conducted,  segregated  by  each  of  the  major  purposes  of 
the  activities,  shall  be  shown  on  the  daily  log  sheet  for  the  last  day  of  each 
month. 

(b)  When  the  activity  involves  ground-based  weather  modification  apparatus, 
records  of  the  following  shall  also  be  maintained,  when  applicable,  but  need  not 
be  made  part  of  the  daily  log : 

(1)  The  location  of  each  item  of  weather  modification  apparatus  in  use 
and  its  identification  such  as  type  and  manufacturer's  model  number.  If  the 
apparatus  is  not  commercially  available,  a  brief  description  of  the  apparatus 
and  the  method  of  operation  should  be  recorded. 

(2)  The  name  and  address  of  the  person  responsible  for  operating  each 
weather  modification  apparatus. 

(3)  The  altitude  and  type  of  weather  phenomenon  subjected  to  weather 
modification  activity  during  each  operational  period  (e.g.,  cumulus  clouds 
between  10,000  and  30,000  feet  m.s.l. ;  ground  fog) . 

(c)  When  the  activity  involves  airborne  weather  modification  apparatus,  rec- 
ords of  the  following  shall  also  be  maintained,  when  applicable,  but  need  not  be 
made  a  part  of  the  daily  log :  For  each  airborne  weather  modification  apparatus 
run :  altitude,  air  speed ;  release  points  of  modification  agents,  method  of  modifi- 
cation and  characteristics  of  flares,  rockets,  or  other  delivery  systems  employed ; 
temperature  at  release  altitude  ;  and,  for  aircraft :  the  type  of  aircraft,  its  identi- 
fication number,  the  airport  or  airports  used,  and  the  names  and  addresses  of  crew 
members  and  the  person  responsible  for  operating  the  weather  modification  ap- 
paratus ;  and  the  altitude  and  type  of  weather  phenomenon  subjected  to  weather 
modification  activity  during  each  operational  period  (e.g.,  cumulus  clouds  between 
10,000  and  30,000  feet  m.s.l. ;  ground  fog) . 

(d)  The  following  records  shall  also  be  maintained,  whenever  applicable,  but 
need  not  be  made  a  part  of  the  daily  log.  Only  data  specifically  collected  for  the 
reported  activity  need  be  retained ;  data  available  from  other  sources  need  not 
be  included. 

(1)  Any  descriptions  that  were  recorded  of  meteorological  conditions  in 
.  '  target  and  control  areas  during  the  periods  of  operation ;  for  example :  per- 
cent of  cloud  cover,  temperature,  humidity,  the  presence  of  lightning,  hail, 
funnel  clouds,  heavy  rain  or  snow,  and  unusual  radar  patterns. 

(2)  All  measurements  made  of  precipitation  in  target  and  control  areas. 

(3)  Any  unusual  results. 

§  908.9  Retention  of  records 

Records  required  under  §  908.8  shall  be  retained  and  available  for  inspection  by 
the  Administrator  or  his  designated  representatives  for  5  years  after  completion 
of  the  activity  to  which  they  relate.  Such  records  shall  be  required  to  be  produced 
for  inspection  only  at  the  place  where  normally  kept.  The  Administrator  shall 
have  the  right  to  make  copies  of  such  records,  if  he  deems  necessary. 

§  908.10  Penalties 

Knowing  and  willful  violation  of  any  rule  adopted  under  the  authority  of  sec- 
tion 2  of  Pub.  L.  92-205  shall  subject  the  person  violating  such  rule  to  a  fine  of  not 
more  than  $10,000,  upon  conviction  thereof. 

§  908.11  Maintenance  of  records  of  related,  activities 

(a)  Persons  whose  activities  relate  to  weather  modification  activities,  other 
than  persons  engaged  in  weather  modification  activities,  shall  maintain  records 
concerning  the  identities  of  purchasers  or  users  of  weather  modification  apparatus 
or  materials,  the  quantities  or  numbers  of  items  purchased,  and  the  times  of  such 
purchases.  Such  information  shall  be  retained  for  at  least  5  years. 

(b)  In  addition,  persons  whose  activities  relate  to  weather  modification  shall 
be  required,  under  the  authority  of  section  4  of  Pub.  L.  92-205,  to  provide  the 
Administrator,  on  his  request,  with  information  he  deems  necessary  to  carry  out 
the  purposes  of  this  act. 

§  908.12  Public  disclosure  of  information 

(a)  Any  records  or  other  information  obtained  by  the  Administrator  under 
these  rules  or  otherwise  under  the  authority  of  Pub.  L.  92-205  shall  be  made  pub- 
licly available  to  the  fullest  practicable  extent.  Such  records  or  information  may 


668 


be  inspected  on  written  request  to  the  Administrator.  However,  the  Administrator 
will  not  disclose  any  information  referred  to  in  section  1905  of  title  18,  United 
States  Code,  and  that  is  otherwise  unavailable  to  the  public,  except  that  such  in- 
formation shall  be  disclosed — 

(1)  To  other  Federal  Government  departments,  agencies,  and  officials  for 
official  use  upon  request ; 

(2)  In  any  judicial  proceeding  under  a  court  order  formulated  to  preserve 
the  confidentiality  of  such  information  without  impairing  the  proceeding ;  and 

(3)  To  the  public,  if  necessary  to  protect  their  health  and  safety. 

(b)  Certified  copies  of  such  reports  and  information,  to  the  extent  publicly 
disclosable,  may  be  obtained  from  the  Administrator  at  cost  in  accordance  with 
the  Department  of  Commerce  implementation  of  the  Freedom  of  Information  Act. 

(c)  Persons  reporting  on  weather  modification  projects  or  related  activities 
shall  specifically  identify  all  information  that  they  consider  not  to  be  subject  to 
public  disclosure  under  the  terms  of  Pub.  L.  92-205  and  provide  reasons  in  support 
thereof.  A  determination  as  to  whether  or  not  reported  information  is  subject  to 
public  dissemination  shall  be  made  by  the  Administrator. 

(d)  When  consideration  of  a  weather  modification  activity  report  and  related 
information  indicates  that  a  proposed  project  may  significantly  depart  from  the 
practices  or  procedures  generally  employed  in  similar  circumstances  to  avoid 
danger  to  persons,  property,  or  the  environment,  or  indicates  that  success  of  Fed- 
eral research  projects  may  be  adversely  affected  if  tlie  proposed  project  is  carried 
out  as  described,  the  Administrator  will  notify  the  opera  tor  (s)  and  State  officials 
of  such  possibility  and  make  recommendations  where  appropriate.  The  purpose  of 
such  notification  shall  be  to  inform  those  notified  of  existing  practices  and  pro- 
cedures or  Federal  research  projects  known  to  NOAA.  Notification  or  recom- 
mendation, or  failure  to  notify  or  recommend,  shall  not  be  construed  as  approval 
or  disapproval  of  a  proposed  project  or  as  an  indication  that,  if  carried  out  as 
proposed  or  recommended  it  may,  in  any  way,  protest  or  endanger  persons,  prop- 
erty, or  the  environment  or  affect  the  success  of  any  Federal  research  project, 
Any  advisory  notification  issued  by  the  Adminsitrator  shall  be  available  to  the 
public  and  be  included  in  the  pertinent  activity  report  file. 

§  908.13  Address  of  letters 

Letters  and  other  communications  intended  for  the  Administrator,  in  connection 
with  weather  modification  reporting  or  activities,  shall  be  addressed  to:  The 
Administrator,  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Environmental 
Modification  Office,  Rockville,  Md.  20852. 

§  908.14  Business  to  oe  transacted  in  writing 

All  business  transacted  with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Adminis- 
tration with  regard  to  reports  of  weather  modification  activities  should  be  trans- 
acted in  writing.  Actions  of  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
will  be  based  exclusively  on  the  written  record. 

%  908.15  Times  for  talcing  action;  expiration  on  Saturday,  Sunday,  or  holiday 
Whenever  periods  of  time  are  specified  in  these  rules  in  days,  calendar  days  are 
intended.  When  the  day,  or  the  last  day,  fixed  under  these  rules  for  taking  any 
action  falls  on  a  Saturday,  Sunday,  or  on  a  Federal  holiday,  the  action  may  be 
taken  on  the  next  succeeding  day  which  is  not  a  Saturday,  Sunday,  or  Federal 
holiday. 

§  908.16  Signature 

All  reports  filed  with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospreric  Administration 
must  be  dated  and  signed  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  person  conducting  or  intending  to 
conduct  the  weather  modification  activities  referred  to  therein  by  such  person, 
individually  or,  in  the  case  of  a  person  other  than  an  individual,  by  a  partner, 
officer,  or  other  person  having  corresponding  functions  and  authority.  For  this 
purpose  "officer"  means  a  president,  vice  president,  treasurer,  secretary,  or  comp- 
troller. Notwithstanding  the  foreging,  such  reports  may  also  be  signed  by  the  duly 
authorized  agent  or  attorney  of  the  person  whose  activities  are  being  reported. 
Proof  of  such  authorization  shall  be  furnished  to  the  Administrator  when  filing  a 
report,  unless  previously  furnished. 

§  908.11  Suspension  or  waiver  of  rules 

In  an  extraordinary  situation,  any  requirement  of  these  rules  may  be  suspended 
or  waived  by  the  Administrator  on  request  of  the  interested  party,  to  the  extent 
such  waiver  is  consistent  with  the  provisions  of  Pub.  L.  92-205  and  subject  to  such 
other  requirements  as  may  be  imposed. 


669 


§  908.18  Matters  not  specifically  provided  for  in  rules 

All  matters  not  specifically  provided  for  or  situations  not  specifically  addressed 
in  these  rules  will  be  decided  in  accordance  with  the  merits  of  each  case  by  or 
under  the  authority  of  the  Administrator,  and  such  decision  will  be  communicated 
in  writing  to  all  parties  involved  in  the  case. 

§  908.19    Publication  of  notice  of  proposed  amendments 

Whenever  required  by  law,  and  in  other  cases  whenever  practicable,  notice  of 
proposed  amendments  to  these  rules  will  be  published  in  the  Federal  Register. 
If  not  published  with  the  notice,  copies  of  the  text  of  proposed  amendments  will 
be  furnished  to  any  person  requesting  the  same.  All  comments,  suggestions,  and 
briefs  received  within  the  time  specified  in  the  notice  will  be  considered  before 
adoption  of  the  proposed  amendments,  which  may  be  modified  in  the  light  thereof. 
Informal  hearings  may  be  held  at  the  discretion  of  the  Administrator. 

%  908.20    Effective  date 

These  rules  are  effective  on  June  10, 1976. 
§  908.21    Report  form 

Pub.  L.  92-205  and  these  rules  should  be  studied  carefully  prior  to  reporting. 
Reports  required  by  these  rules  shall  be  submitted  on  forms  obtainable  on 
request  from  the  Administrator,  or  on  an  equivalent  format.  In  special  situations, 
such  alterations  to  the  forms  as  the  circumstances  thereto  may  render  neces- 
sary may  be  made,  provided  they  do  not  depart  from  the  requirements  of  these 
rules  or  of  Pub.  L.  92-205. 

[FR  Doc.  76-16807  Filed  6-9-76  ;8  :45  am] 


34-857  O  -  79  -  45 


670 


Attachment 


CaapMi  *>  acattma  vtth  witwrtiwi  «  rmrat  mt  farari  cm 

Form  Appro vtxf  0MB  No.  41-2664  E^res  12-2) -77 

TO:  Environmental  Modification  Office  (EM-5) 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
Rockville.  Maryland  20852 

NOAA  FORM  17-4                        U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE 

(S-761                                     N  AT'  L  OCEANIC  AND  ATMOSPHERIC  ADM. 

■ntivtat    armkBT  nil  wr  ituf  ■  UAnieiniviay 

INITIAL  REPORT  ON  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 
ACTIVITIES        (P.L.  205,  92NO.  CONGRESS) 

1.  PROJECT  OR  ACTIVITY  DESIGNATION,  IF  ANY 

2.  DATES  OF  PROJECT 

a.  DATE  FIRST  ACTUAL  WEATHER 
MODIFICATION  ACTIVITY  IS  TO 
BE  UNDERTAKEN 

X   PURPOSE  OP  PROJECT  OR  ACTIVITY 

».  EXPECTED  TERMINATION 
DATE  OF  WEATHER 
MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES 

4.I.!  SPONSOR 

4.1b)  OPERATOR 

NAME 

NAME 

AFFILIATION 

PHONE  NUMBER 

AFFILIATION 

PHONE  NUMBER 

STREET  ADDRESS 

STREET  ADDRESS 

CITY 

STATE 

ZIP  CODE 

CITY 

STATE 

ZIP  CODE 

S.   TARGET  AND  CONTROL  AREAS  (See  7n. miction.; 

TARGET  AREA 

CONTROL  AREA 

LOCATION 

SIZE  OF  AREA 

•O.  Ml. 

LOCATION 

SIZE  OF  AREA 

SO.  Mt. 

4.    DESCRIPTION  OP  WEATNER  M.ODIPICATION  APPARATUS.  MODIFICATION  AGENTS  AND  TNEIR  DISPERSAL  RATES,  THE  TECHNIQUES 
EMPLOYED,  ETC.  rs—  tnetmcttehe) 

7.   LOO  ROCCS 

Enter  name,  affiliation,  address,  and  telephone  number  of 
reaponaible  individual  from  whom  log  books  or  other  records 
may  be  obtained. 

NAME 

AFFILIATION 

PHONE  NUMBER 

STREET  AODRESS 

CITY 

STATE 

ZIP  CODE 

a.  SAFETY  AND  ENVIRONMENT 

□  Yes      □  NO     Haa  an  Environmental  Impact  Statement,  Federal  or  State  been  filed?   If  yes,  please  furnish  a  copy  as 

applicable. 

□  YCf     Q  NO    Have  proriaions  been  made  to  acquire  the  latest  forecasts,  advisories,  warnings,  etc.  of  the  National 

Weather  Service,  Forest  Service,  or  others  when  issued  prior  to  and  during  operations?   If  yes,  please 
specify  oo  a  separate  sheet. 

□  YES    £3  NO    Have  any  aafety  procedures  (operational  constraints,  provisions  /or  mumpmmion  of  operations,  monitoring 

method*,  ate.)  and  any  environmental  guidelines  {related  to  the  possible  effects  of  the  operations) 
been  included  in  the  operational  plans?   If  yes,  pleaae  furnish  copies  or  a  description  of  the  specific 
procedures  and  guidelines. 

V.   OPTIONAL  REMARKS  (See  M< miction..   Urn*  Separate  Sheet.) 

NAME 

rfiTiPirniny         1  certify  that  the  above  statements  are  true,  complete 
CERTIFICATION!        and  correct  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief. 

AFFILIATION 

SIGNATURE 

STRICT  ADDRESS 

OFFICIAL  TITLE 

CITY 

STATE 

ZIP  CODE 

DATE 

PHONE  NUMBER 

Instructions  for  Initial  Report  on  Weather  Modification  Activities 

"This  report  is  required  by  Public  Law  92-205;  85  Stat  735;  15  TJ.S.C.  3301). 
Knowing  and  willful  violation  of  any  rule  adopted  under  the  authority  of  Section 
2  of  Public  Law  92-205  shall  subject  the  person  violating  such  to  a  fine  or  not 
more  than  $10,000,  upon  conviction  thereof." 

One  completed  copy  of  this  form  is  to  be  received  10  days1  or  more  prior  to 
actual  modification  activities.  A  NOAA  file  number  will  be  assigned  by  tbc 
Administrator  after  receipt  of  the  initial  report  for  each  project  or  activity. 

1  For  exceptions,  see  Sections  908.4(b)  and  (c),  Part  908  of  Title  15,  Code  of  Federal 
Regulations. 


671 


A  supplemental  report  in  a  letter  form  referring  to  the  appropriate  NOAA  file 
number  must  be  made  to  the  Administrator  if  the  "Initial  Report"  is  found  to 
contain  any  material  inaccuracies,  misstatements,  and  omissions,  or  if  there  are 
changes  in  plans  for  the  project  or  activity. 

Item  1.  Enter  designation,  if  any,  used  by  operator  for  the  project  or  activity. 

Item  2.  Enter : 

(a)  Date  first  actual  weather  modification  activity  is  to  be  undertaken; 

(b)  Date  on  which  final  weather  modification  activity  is  expected  to  occur. 
Item  3.  Enter  the  purpose  of  the  project  or  activity :  e.g.,  rainfall  increase, 

hail  suppression,  cold  fog  dispersal,  etc. 
Item  4.  Enter : 

(a)  Name,  phone  number,  affiliation,  and  address  of  the  primary  person 
for  whom  the  project  is  to  be  performed  ( sponsor ) . 

(b)  Name,  phone  number,  affiliation,  and  address  of  the  person  primarily 
responsible  for  carrying  out  the  project  (operator) . 

Item  5.  A  map  should  be  attached  showing  size  and  location  of  target  area, 
control  area,  coded  number  and  location  of  each  item  of  ground-based  weather 
modification  apparatus  and  coded  number  and  location  of  key  raingages,  radars, 
or  other  precipitation  measuring  devices.  Also  show  location  of  airport  for  air- 
borne operations. 

Item  6.  Describe  the  weather  modification  apparatus,  modification  agents,  and 
the  techniques  to  be  used.  This  would  include  type  of  ground  or  airborne  appara- 
tus to  be  used,  type  of  modification  material  to  be  dispensed,  rate  of  dispensing 
material  in  grams  per  hour  or  other  appropriate  units,  type  of  precipitation  gages 
to  be  used  in  target  and  control  areas,  and  any  other  pertinent  information  such 
as  type  of  radars,  type  of  aircraft  to  be  used,  techniques  to  be  employed,  (e.g., 
cloud  base  seeding  at  10,000  feet  msl). 

Item  7.  List  name,  phone  number,  affiliation,  and  address  of  the  responsible 
individual  from  whom  log  books  or  other  records  may  be  obtained. 

Item  8.  Provide  applicable  answers  to  questions  as  indicated. 

Item  9.  This  item  is  to  permit  the  reporting  person  to  include  any  information 
not  covered  by  items  1  through  8  but  which  he  feels  is  significant  or  of  interest. 
It  is  also  to  be  used  to  include  any  information  not  covered  elsewhere  that  the 
Administrator  may  request. 


672 


Attachment 


FORM  APPROVED  O.M.B.  NO.  4J-R2664 
APPROVAL  EXPIRES  >2-3?-77 


NOAA  FORM  17 -4 A 


U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  Of  COMMERCE 

IONAL  OCEANIC  AND  ATMOSPHERIC  ADMINISTRATION 


INTERIM  ACTIVITY  REPORTS  AND  FINAL  REPORT 
"This  report  is  required  by  Public  Law  92-  205/85  Sfof  735;  ?5  U.S.C.  3306. 
Knowing  and  willful  violation  of  any  rule  adopted  under  the  authority  of  sec- 
tion 2  of  Public  Law  92—205  snail  subject  the  person  violating  sued  rule  to 
a  fin*  of  not  more  than  $10,000,  upon  conviction  thereof."  


NOAA  FILE  NUMBEf 


I  i  INTERIM  REPORT 
I     I  FINAL  REPORT 


Complete  in  accordance  with  instructions  on  reverse  «nd  forward  one  copy: 

TO:    Environmental  Modification  Office  (EM-5) 

National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
Rocltville,  Maryland  20852  


(a) 


NUMBER 

Of 

MODIFICATION 
DAYS 


NUMBER  OF  MODIFICATION 
DAYS  PER  MAJOR  PURPOSE 


NUMBER 

OF  MODI- 
FICATION 
MISSIONS 


NOURS  OF 
APPARATUS 
OPERATION 

BY  TYPE 


REPORTING  PERIOD 


TYPE  AND  AMOUNT 
OF  AGENT  USED 


FEBRUARY 


MARCH 


APRIL 


MAY 


JUNE 


JULY 


AUGUST 


SEPTEMBER 


OCTOBER 


NOVEMBER 


DECEMBER 


TOTAL 


TOTALS 
FOR 
FINAL 
REPORT 


DATE  ON  WHICH  FINAL  WEATHER  MODIFICATIOM  ACTIVITY  OCCURRED  (For  Fins  I  Report  Only) 


NAME  OF  REPORTING  PERSON 

CERTIFI-   j  cemfv  ,),.,  .n  statements  in  this  repon  on  this  weather  modification  proieci  are 
CA1ION:     complete  and  correct  to  ihe  best  of  my  knowledge  and  are  made  in  good  faith 

AFFILIATION 

SIGNATURE 

STREET  ADDRESS 

OFFICIAL  TITLE 

CITY 

STATE 

ZIP  CODE 

DATE 

NOl«   FORM   17-4*  61 


Instructions  for  Interim  and  Final  Reports 

Any  person  engaged  in  any  weather  modification  project  or  activity  in  the 
United  States  on  January  1  in  any  year  shall  submit  one  copy  of  this  form  setting 
forth  as  of  such  date  the  information  required  with  respect  to  each  such  con- 
tinuing project  or  activity  not  previously  furnished  in  a  prior  interim  report. 
The  box  indicating  "Interim  Report"  should  be  checked.  The  January  1  date 
nhall  not  apply  if  other  arrangements  have  previously  been  made  with  the  writ- 
ten approval  of  the  Administrator  of  NOAA.  The  report  shall  be  received  by 
NOAA  not  later  than  45  days  following  the  end  of  the  reported  period. 

Upon  completion  of  a  project  or  activity  one  copy  of  this  report  shall  be  sub- 
mit ted  and  the  box  checked  indicating  "Final  Report."  The  final  report  shall  be 


673 


received  by  NOAA  not  later  than  45  days  after  the  completion  of  the  project  or 
activity. 

The  NOAA  File  Number  should  be  filled  in  for  any  project  for  which  the 
Administrator  has  assigned  a  file  number. 

A  supplemental  report  in  letter  form  referring  to  the  appropriate  NOAA  file 
number  must  be  made  to  the  Administrator  if  the  "Interim"  or  "Final"  reports 
are  found  to  contain  any  material  inaccuracies,  misstatements,  and  omissions. 

INTERIM  REPORT 

The  information  in  Items  (a)  through  (e)  on  the  report  form  should  be  pro- 
vided as  prescribed  below  for  the  months  to  which  the  report  pertains.  If  no 
data  are  applicable  for  any  given  item  in  any  month,  enter  zero. 

Item  (a)  :  Enter  number  of  days  on  which  actual  weather  modification 
activities  took  place. 

Item  (b)  :  Enter  in  the  appropriate  column  number  of  days  on  which  modifica- 
tion activities  were  conducted,  segregated  by  each  of  the  major  purposes  of  the 
activities.  Normally,  the  total  of  entries  in  (b)  would  equal  total  in  (a). 

Item  (c)  :  Enter  number  of  modification  missions  that  were  carried  out. 

Item  (d)  :  Enter  in  the  appropriate  column  total  number  of  hours  of  operation 
of  each  type  of  weather  modification  apparatus,  (i.e.,  net  hours  of  agent  release). 
If  the  form  does  not  contain  sufficient  space,  report  additional  types  on  a  sepa- 
rate sheet. 

Item  (e)  :  Enter  in  the  appropriate  column  total  amount  of  agent  used,  by 
type.  If  the  form  does  not  contain  sufficient  space,  report  additional  types  on  a 
separate  sheet. 

The  totals  for  these  items  shall  be  provided  for  the  period  covered  by  the 
interim  report. 

FINAL  REPORT 

The  final  report  shall  contain  the  information  required  for  interim  reports,  to 
the  extent  not  previously  reported.  In  addition,  the  items  designated  as  "Totals 
for  Final  Report"  should  be  reported.  This  information  should  pertain  to  the 
entire  project  or  activity  period,  rather  than  only  the  period  since  the  last  interim 
report.  At  the  space  at  the  end  of  the  form,  enter  the  date  on  which  final 
weather  modification  activity  occurred. 


674 


MONTH  AND  YEAR                                      NOAA  FILE  MUMMER 

DESIGNATION  OF  APPARATUS 

■ 

0 

« 
X 

111 
a 

O 
b. 
O 

I 

z 

D  INSTRUCTIONS  ON  REVERSE  BEFORE  ENTERING  DATA  ON  FORM 

> 

U 
< 

0 

Mj 

■t 
3 
ft, 

s 

* 

K 

u 
z 

0 

< 

> 
m 

j 

s 

I 

: 

INCREASE 

* 

0 
z 

i 

K 

MODIFICATION  AGENT 

Z 

0" 

I 

< 

Ul 

NOAA  FORM  I7-4B                                                                                     U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  OP  COMMERCE 

l6_76,                                                                               NATIONAL  OCEANIC  AND  ATMOSPHERIC  ADMINISTRATION 

DAILY  LOG  DURING  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES 

This  report  is  required  by  Public  Law  92-205;  85  Stat  735;  15  U.S.C.  330b.   Knowing  and 
willful  violation  of  any  rule  adopted  under  the  authority  of  section  2  of  Public  Law  92-205  shall 
subject  the  person  violating  such  rule  to  a  fine  of  not  more  than  $10,000,  upon  conviction  thereof. 

LOCAL  TIME 

o" 

0. 

0, 

K 

<n 

CAREFULLY  RE/ 

POSITION  OR  LOCATION 

MONTHLY  TOTAL 

< 
a 

Instructions  for  Completing  Daily  Log  Form 

daily  log  of  activities 

This  is  a  suggested  form  to  be  used  in  recording  the  information  required  to 
be  kept  by  Section  908.8,  Part  908  of  Title  15,  Code  of  Federal  Regulations. 
Other  logs  may  be  used,  providing  they  contain  the  information  required.  A 
tabular  form  is  provided  on  which  to  report  a  daily  log  of  activities  for  each 
unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus.  The  form  is  suitable  for  recording  opera- 
tion of  individual  items  of  ground  or  airborne  apparatus.  In  the  spaces  provided 
above  the  columns,  write  the  designation  of  the  wreather  modification  apparatus, 
coded  to  refer  to  the  description  required  by  Sections  908.8(b)  (1)  and  908.8(c). 


675 


Part  908  of  Title  15,  Code  of  Federal  Regulations,  the  month  and  year  of  daily 
record,  the  name  of  the  operator,  and  the  NOAA  file  number.  These  or  other  logs 
containing  the  required  information  shall  be  retained  for  5  years ;  they  are  not 
to  be  sent  to  NOAA. 
Explanation  of  columns  follows  : 

Column  (1)  :  State  date  of  the  weather  modification  activity. 

Column  (2)  :  Give  each  aircraft  position  or  location  of  each  item  of  weather 
modification  apparatus  during  each  modification  mission.  Maps  may  be  used. 

Columns  (3  and  (4)  :  State  local  time  when  modification  activity  began  and 
ended.  Use  24-hour  clock  time  (e.g.,  0100  signifies  1 :00  a.m.  and  2300  signifies 
11 :00  p.m.).  For  intermittent  operations,  the  start  and  end  of  the  total  sequences 
are  acceptable. 

Column  (5)  :  Give  duration  of  operation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification 
apparatus,  in  hours  and  minutes.  (Col.  5-Col.  4-Col.  3). 
Column  (6)  :  Describe  type  of  modification  agent  used. 

Column  (7)  :  Give  rate  of  dispersal  of  agent  during  the  period  of  actual  opera- 
tion of  weather  modification  apparatus,  by  hour  or  other  appropriate  time  period. 

Column  (8)  :  Give  total  amount  of  modification  agent  used.  If  more  than  one 
agent  was  used,  report  total  for  each  type  separately. 

Columns  (9),  (10),  (11),  (12)  and  (13)  :  Check  once  for  each  day  on  which 
modification  activities  were  conducted,  segregated  by  each  of  the  major  purposes 
of  the  activities. 

On  the  daily  log  sheet  for  the  last  day  of  each  month,  give  monthly  totals,  for 
Columns  (5),  (8),  (9),  (10),  (11),  (12),  and  (13). 


Appendix  M 


Selected  State  Kules  and  Regulations  for  the  Administration 
or  State  Weather  Modification  Statutes 

Illinois 

State  of  Illinois  Rules  and  Regulations  for  the  Administration  and 
Enforcement  of  the  Provisions  of  the  Weather  Modification  Control  Act 

department  of  registration  and  education 

(Ronald  E.  Stackler,  Director,  Springfield) 

[Printed  by  Authority  of  the  State  of  Illinois] 

Foreword 

These  Rules  are  issued  under  the  authority  of  Sections  6,  11,  12,  17,  20  and  26, 
Chapter  146%,  Illinois  Revised  Statutes,  1973,  S  The  Weather  Modification  Con- 
trol Act. 

RULE  1  CONCEPT  OF  RULES 

1.  Purpose  of  Rules. — These  Rules  are  adopted  to  promote  properly  conducted 
weather  modification  operations  and  research  and  development,  to  minimize  pos- 
sible adverse  effects  from  weather  modification  activities  and  to  facilitate  the 
administration  and  enforcement  of  the  Weather  Modification  Control  Act.  These 
Rules  shall  be  liberally  construed  to  carry  out  these  objectives  and  purposes. 

2.  Use  and  Effect  of  Rules. — These  Rules  are  prescribed  for  the  performance  of 
the  statutory  powers  and  functions  vested  in  the  Department  of  Registration  and 
Education.  In  no  event  shall  any  Rule  or  Rules  be  construed  as  a  limitation  or 
restriction  upon  the  exercise  of  any  statutory  power  of  the  Department. 

3.  Suspension  or  Modification  of  Rules. — These  Rules  may  be  suspended  or 
modified  by  the  Director  of  the  Department  of  Registration  and  Education,  in 
whole  or  in  part,  in  the  interest  of  justice.  The  Department  of  Registration  and 
Education  by  and  through  the  Director  reserves  the  right  to  waive  compliance 
with  any  of  these  Rules  whenever  in  the  Director's  judgment,  no  party  will  be 
injured  thereby. 

4.  Construction  of  Rules. — These  Rules  should  not  be  construed  to  abrogate, 
modify  or  limit  any  rights,  privileges,  or  immunities  granted  or  protected  by  the 
Constitution  or  laws  of  the  United  States  or  the  Constitution  or  laws  of  the  State 
of  Illinois  nor  to  deny  any  person  life,  liberty,  or  property  without  due  process  of 
law. 

RULE  2 — DEFINITIONS 

As  used  in  these  Rules,  unless  the  context  otherwise  requires,  the  terms  specified 
herein  have  the  meanings  ascribed  to  them  herein  or  by  the  Weather  Modification 
Control  Act,  whichever  shall  be  applicable,  as  same  may  be,  at  any  time  or  from 
time  to  time,  amended. 

1.  Act  or  Weather  Modification  Control  Act. — "Act"  or  "Weather  Modification 
Control  Act"  means  "An  Act  to  regulate  weather  modification  in  this  State  and 
amending  certain  Acts  therein  named  in  connection  therewith"  (P.A.  78-674, 
effective  October  1,  1973),  as  same  may  at  any  time  or  from  time  to  time,  be 
amended. 

2.  Weather  Modification  Apparatus. — "Weather  Modification  Apparatus"  means 
any  apparatus  used  with  the  intention  of  producing  artificial  changes  in  the  com- 
position, motions  and  resulting  behavior  of  the  atmosphere. 

:>,.  Sponsor. — "Sponsor"  means  any  person  who  enters  into  an  agreement  with  a 
permittee  to  perform  an  operation. 

4.  Target  Area.— "Target  Area"  means  the  surface  area  within  which  the  effects 
of  an  operation  are  expected  to  be  found. 


(676) 


677 


5.  Operations  Area. — "Operations  Area"  means  the  area  in  which  an  operation 
is  conducted  to  produce  or  attempt  to  produce  the  desired  effect  within  the  target 
area. 

6.  Control  Area. — "Control  Area"  means  a  preselected,  untreated  surface  area 
in  which  no  effects  are  expected  and  which  is  used  for  comparison  with  a  target 
area. 

7.  Professional  Level. — "Professional  Level"  means  a  level  of  responsibility  for 
direct  supervision  and  conduct  of  operations  or  substantial  parts  thereof. 

8.  Department's  Address.— 628  East  Adams  Street,  Springfield,  Illinois  62786, 
or  such  other  address  as  shall  at  any  time  or  from  time  to  time,  be  designated  by 
the  Director  or  his  duly  designated  representative. 

RULE  3  ADMINISTRATION 

1.  Director. — The  powers  and  duties  of  the  Department  enumerated  in  the 
Illinois  Civil  Administrative  Code,  where  applicable,  the  Act  and  these  Rules 
shall  be  exercised  by  the  Director. 

2.  Board. — Reports  from  the  Board,  except  in  emergencies,  shall  be  in  writing. 
The  Chairman  of  the  Board  shall  be  responsible  for  forwarding  to  the  Director 
reports  from  the  Board  promptly  and  for  keeping  other  members  of  the  Board 
advised  of  pending  business  of  the  Board.  The  Director  shall  act  promptly  upon 
receipt  of  reports  from  the  Board. 

RULE  4 — HEARINGS 

1.  Hearings  Required. — Except  for  emergency  modifications  of  operational  per- 
mits as  provided  for  in  Section  21(b)  of  the  Act,  before  suspending,  revoking, 
refusing  to  renew  or  modifying  a  license  or  a  permit,  the  Department  shall  con- 
duct a  hearing  in  conformity  with  Section  8  of  the  Act. 

2.  Stenographic  Record. — The  stenographic  record  of  a  hearing  shall  be  re- 
tained for  at  least  five  years.  It  need  not  be  transcribed  unless  there  is  judicial 
review  of  the  final  administrative  decision  under  Section  25  of  the  Act. 

RULE  5 — LICENSE  AND  PERMIT  REQUIRED 

1.  Requirement. — Except  as  provided  in  Subsection  2  of  this  Rule,  no  person 
may  engage  in  weather  modification  activities  : 

(a)  Without  both  a  professional  weather  modification  license  issued  under 
Rule  6  and  a  weather  modification  operational  permit  issued  under  Rule  7 ; 
or 

(b)  In  violation  of  any  term,  condition  or  limitation  of  such  license  or 
permit. 

2.  Exemptions. — The  following  activities  are  exempted  from  the  license  and 
permit  requirements  of  the  Act : 

(a)  Research  and  development  conducted  by  the  State,  its  subdivisions 
and  agencies  of  the  State  and  of  its  subdivisions,  institutions  of  higher  learn- 
ing and  bona  fide  research  organizations  ; 

(b)  Activities  for  protection  against  fire,  frost  or  fog ;  and 

(c)  Activities  normally  conducted  for  purposes  other  than  inducing,  in- 
creasing, decreasing  or  preventing  hail,  precipitation,  clouds  or  tornadoes. 

3.  Conduct  of  Exempt  Activities. — Exempted  activities  shall  be  so  conducted 
as  not  to  interfere  with  weather  modification  operations  conducted  under  a 
permit  issued  in  accordance  with  the  Act  and  these  Rules. 

4.  Notice  of  Exempt  Activities. — Persons  conducting  exempted  operations 
and  research  and  development  shall  file  with  the  Department  the  original 
of^a  notice  form  available  from  the  Department  and  with  the  Chairman  of  the 
Board  at  the  Department's  address  a  copy  of  the  form  indicating  their  intent  to 
engage  in  such  activities.  Information  from  notice  forms  will  be  used  in  ascer- 
taining the  extent  to  which  records  should  be  kept  for  exempted  activities  under 
Rule  8(6)  and  reports  should  be  filed  on  such  activities  under  Rule  9(5).  Notice 
forms  will  require  the  following  data  : 

( a )  Name  and  address  of  the  person  giving  notice ; 

(b)  Name  and  address  of  the  sponsor  (if  any)  of  the  operation  or  research 
and  development ; 

( c )  Whether  the  activity  is  operational  or  research  and  development ; 

(d)  Nature  and  object  to  the  activity ; 


678 


(e)  The  legal  description  of  and  a  map  showing  the  operations  area,  tar- 
get area  and  control  area,  if  the  activity  involves  any  such  areas ; 

(f)  The  approximate  starting  date  of  the  activity  and  its  anticipated 
duration ; 

(g)  The  kind  of  weather  modification  agent (s)  intended  for  use;  and 

(h)  The  kinds  of  weather  modification  apparatus  which  will  be  used. 

RULE  6 — LICENSES 

1.  Criteria  for  Issuance :  Issuance  of  licenses  shall  be  based  on  the  applicant's 
character,  knowledge  of  weather  modification  principles  and  techniques  and  ex- 
perience in  their  application.  The  following  shall  be  the  minimum  educational 
and  experience  criteria : 

(a)  A  minimum  of  two  years'  field  experience  at  the  professional  level  in 
weather  modification  field  operations  or  research  ;  and 

(b)  One  of  the  following  three  requirements  : 

(1)  Six  additional  years'  experience  in  weather  modification  field  opera- 
tions or  research ;  or 

(1)  Six  additional  years'  experience  in  weather  modification  field 
operations  or  research ;  or 

(2)  A  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics,  or  the  physical  sciences 
plus  two  additional  years'  experience  in  weather  modification  field  op- 
erations or  research ;  or 

(3)  A  degree  in  meteorology,  or  a  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics, 
or  the  physical  sciences  which  includes  or  is  in  addition  to  at  least 
twenty-five  semester  hours  of  meteorological  course  work. 

2.  Application  for  License. — An  applicant  for  a  license  shall  fill  out  and  file 
with  the  Department  the  original  of  an  application  form  available  from  the  De- 
partment and  a  copy  thereof  with  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  at  the  Depart- 
ment's address  no  later  than  thirty  days  before  the  applicant  plans  to  use  the 
license.  The  form  shall  require  relevant  information  about  the  applicant's  char- 
acter, knowledge  of  weather  modification  principles  and  experience  in  their  ap- 
plication. Among  the  data  required  is  information  about  the  applicant's : 

(a)  Educational  background  at  the  college  and  graduate  level.  This  in- 
cludes the  dates  of  attendance  and  of  graduation,  the  major  and  minor 
subjects  (including  the  number  of  semester  hours  of  meteorological  course 
work),  the  degrees  received,  and  the  titles  of  any  thesis  and/or  dissertation. 

(b)  Experience  in  weather  modification  or  related  activities.  Attention 
should  be  given  to  experience  with  reference  to  meteorological  conditions 
typical  of  Illinois.  The  applicant  should  list  the  dates  of  each  position  held, 
the  title  of  the  position  (indicate  whether  it  was  of  sub-professional  or 
professional  level),  the  name  and  address  of  the  employer,  a  description 
of  the  work  done  (indicate  both  the  magnitude  and  complexity  of  the  work 
and  the  duties  and  degree  of  responsibility  for  the  work),  and  the  name 
and  address  of  the  supervisor. 

(c)  Scientific  or  engineering  society  affiliations  and  the  grade  of  member- 
ship in  and  certification  by  each. 

(d)  Publications,  patents  and  reports. 

(e)  Three  references  who  will  attest  to  the  applicant's  character,  knowl- 
edge of  weather  modification  principles  and  experience  in  their  application 

(f )  A  list  of  all  jurisdictions  in  which  the  applicant  has  previously  filed 
application  for  a  professional  weather  modification  license.  The  outcome 
of  such  applications  should  be  indicated. 

(g)  A  list  of  all  law  suits  relating  to  weather  modification  from  any  juris- 
diction in  which  the  applicant  was  a  party  or  where  the  applicant  was 
employed  by  a  party  thereto  at  the  time  involved  therein. 

(h)  Indication  whether  a  professional  weather  modification  license  is- 
sued to  the  applicant  in  any  jurisdiction  has  ever  been  suspended,  revoked, 
placed  on  probationary  status  or  subjected  to  any  other  disciplinary  actions 
or  whether  there  has  been  refusal  to  renew  such  a  license  by  any  juris- 
diction. If  there  has  been  any  such  suspension,  revocation,  placement  on 
probationary  status  or  other  disciplinary  action  or  refusal  to  renew,  the 
circumstances  must  be  explained  in  full. 

3.  Procedure  for  Issuance. — The  Department  shall  evaluate  the  applications, 
Including  the  responses  from  references,  and  such  other  relevant  data  about  ap- 
plicants as  it  possesses  or  discovers.  The  Department  in  its  discretion  shall  also 


679 


have  the  right  to  interview  any  applicant.  On  the  oasis  of  that  information 
the  Department  shall,  within  sixty  days  of  receipt  of  an  application,  determine 
whether  the  applicant  meets  the  educational  and  experience  criteria  established 
by  Subsection  1  of  this  Rule  and  whether  the  applicant  possesses  the  character, 
knowledge  and  experience  necessary  to  engage  in  weather  modification  opera- 
tions. The  Director  shall  issue  a  license  to  each  applicant  who  pays  the  license 
fee  established  by  Section  13  of  the  Act  and  who  demonstrates  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  the  Department  the  competence,  by  virtue  of  character,  knowledge  and 
experience,  necessary  to  engage  in  weather  modification  operations.  If  an  appli- 
cant for  a  license  does  not  pay  the  license  fee  established  by  Section  13  of  the 
Act  or  does  not  demonstrate  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Department  the  compe- 
tence, by  virtue  of  character,  knowledge  and  experience,  necessary  to  engage  in 
weather  modification  operations,  the  Department  shall  deny  the  application  for 
the  license. 

4.  Renewal  of  License. — Forty-five  days  before  expiration  of  licenses  the  De- 
partment shall  mail  license  application  forms  to  all  licensees  and  request  each 
licensee  to  complete  the  form  and  file  the  original  with  the  Department  and  a 
copy  with  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  at  the  Department's  address.  The  Depart- 
ment shall  evaluate  the  available  data  about  the  licensee  and  shall  issue  a 
renewal  license  within  thirty  days  of  receipt  of  the  application  to  each  appli- 
cant who  pays  the  renewal  fee  established  by  Section  13  of  the  Act  and  who 
has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  issuance  of  an  original  license.  The  Depart- 
ment shall  deny  a  renewal  license  within  thirty  days  of  receipt  of  the  appli- 
cation of  each  applicant  who  does  not  pay  the  renewal  fee  or  who  does  not 
possess  the  qualifications  necessary  for  issuance  of  an  original  license. 

RULE  7  PERMITS 

1.  Criteria  for  Issuance. — Issuance  of  permits  to  conduct  weather  modification 
operations  shall  be  based  on  the  following  factors  : 

(a)  The  applicant  holds,  or  if  the  applicant  is  an  organization  rather 
than  an  individual,  the  individual  who  will  be  physically  present  in  Illinois 
in  control  of  the  operation  and  under  whose  direction  on  a  day-by-day  basis  it 
will  be  carried  out  holds,  a  valid  professional  weather  modification  license 
issued  under  Section  12  of  the  Act  and  Rule  6 ; 

(b)  The  applicant  has  furnished  proof  of  financial  responsibility  in  ac- 
cordance with  Section  20  of  the  Act  and  under  Rule  7  (6)  ; 

(c)  The  operation  has  technical  and  scientific  feasibility  and  is  reason- 
ably conceived  to  do  all  or  any  of  the  following :  improve  water  quality  or 
quantity,  reduce  losses  from  weather  hazards,  provide  economic  benefits 
for  the  people  of  the  State,  ad\tence  or  enhance  scientific  knowledge  or 
otherwise  carry  out  the  objectives  and  purposes  of  the  Act  and  these  Rules ; 

(d)  The  operation  does  not  involve  a  high  degree  of  substantial  risk  to 
persons  or  property,  is  designed  to  include  adequate  safeguards  to  minimize 
possible  damage  to  the  public  health,  safety  or  welfare  or  to  the  environ- 
ment and  includes  an  emergency  shutdown  procedure  which  states  con- 
ditions under  which  operations  must  be  suspended  because  of  possible  dan- 
ger to  the  public  health,  safety  and  welfare  or  to  the  environment ; 

(e)  The  operation  will  not  adversely  affect  another  operation  for  which 
a  permit  has  been  issued  ; 

(f )  The  operation  will  not  adversely  affect  any  existing  research  and  de- 
velopment project  exempted  from  the  licensing  and  permit  requirements 
by  Rule  5  (2)  (a)  ; 

(g)  The  applicant  has  complied  with  the  permit  fee  requirement  estab- 
lished by  Section  18  of  the  Act . 

(h)  The  applicant  has  an  acceptable  plan  for  evaluation  of  the  operation 
by  using  available  surface  data  from  sources  such  as  the  United  States 
Department  of  Agriculture  county  crop  yield  reports,  the  United  States 
Geological  Survey  stream  flow  gauges,  the  National  Weather  Service  tern 
perature  and  precipitation  gauges  and  reports  and  the  hail  loss  insurance 
records  for  the  region  ;  and 

(i)  The  project  conforms  to  such  other  criteria  as  are  set  forth  in  the 
objects  and  purposes  of  the  Act  and  of  these  Rules. 

2.  Application  for  Permit. — An  applicant  for  a  permit  shall  fill  out  and  file 
with  the  Department  the  original  of  an  application  form  available  from  the  De- 
partment and  a  copy  thereof  with  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  at  the  Depart- 


680 


merit's  address  no  later  than  thirty  days  before  the  applicant  plans  to  use  the 
permit.  The  form  shall  require  relevant  information  about  the  applicant  and 
the  proposed  operation  from  which  the  Department  can  make  an  informed  judg- 
ment whether  or  not  to  issue  the  permit  and,  in  case  of  issuance  of  the  permit, 
what  conditions  and  limitations  should  be  placed  upon  it.  Among  the  data  re- 
quired is  the  following  information  about  the  applicant  and  the  project : 

(a)  Name  and  address  of  the  applicant ; 

(b)  Whether  a  weather  modification  operational  permit  issued  to  the  ap- 
plicant in  any  jurisdiction  has  ever  been  suspended,  revoked,  placed  on 
probationary  status  or  subjected  to  any  other  disciplinary  action  or  whether 
there  has  been  refusal  to  renew  such  a  permit  by  any  jurisdiction.  If  there 
has  been  any  such  suspension,  revocation,  placement  on  probationary  status 
or  other  disciplinary  action  or  refusal  to  renew,  the  circumstances  must  be 
explained  in  full ; 

(c)  If  the  applicant  is  a  corporation,  whether  it  is  licensed  to  do  busi- 
ness in  Illinois ; 

(d)  Names,  addresses  and  numbers  of  all  professional  licenses  issued 
under  Section  12  of  the  Act  and  Rule  6  of  the  individuals  in  control  of  the 
operation  and  under  whose  direction  on  a  day-by-day  basis  it  will  be  carried 
out ; 

(e)  Whether  professional  weather  modification  licenses  issued  to  such 
licenses  in  any  jurisdiction  have  ever  been  suspended  or  revoked  or  placed 
on  probationary  status  or  subjected  to  any  other  disciplinary  action  or 
whether  there  has  been  refusal  to  renew  such  licenses  by  any  jurisdiction. 
If  there  has  been  any  such  suspension,  revocation,  placement  on  proba- 
tionary status  or  other  disciplinary  action,  or  refusal  to  renew,  the  circum- 
stances must  be  explained  in  full ; 

(f)  Whether  proof  of  financial  responsibility  has  been  furnished  in  ac- 
cordance with  Section  20  of  the  Act  and  Rule  7(6); 

(g)  If  the  operation  will  be  conducted  under  a  contract,  the  value  of  the 
contract ; 

(h)  If  the  operation  will  not  be  conducted  under  a  contract,  an  estimate 
of  the  costs  of  the  operation  and  information  as  to  how  the  estimate  was 
made ; 

(i)  A  copy  of  any  promotional  and  advertising  material  used  in  connec- 
tion with  negotiations  for  the  contract  with  the  sponsor  (if  any)  ; 

(j)  A  complete  and  detailed  operational  plan  for  the  operation  which 
includes : 

(1)  The  nature  and  objects  of  the  operation  ; 

(2)  The  legal  descriptions  of  and  a  map  showing  the  operations 
area,  the  target  area  and  the  control  area  (if  any)  ; 

(3)  The  approximate  starting  date  of  the  operation  and  its  antici- 
pated duration ; 

(4)  The  kind  of  seeding  agent (s)  intended  for  use  and  the  antici- 
pated rate  of  their  uses ; 

(5)  The  kinds  of  weather  modification  apparatus  which  will  be  used 
and  the  method  (s)  of  seeding  for  which  they  will  be  used ; 

(6)  An  emergency  shutdown  procedure  which  states  conditions  under 
which  operations  must  be  suspended  because  of  possible  danger  to  the 
public  health,  safety  and  welfare  or  to  the  environment ; 

(7)  The  means  by  which  the  operation  plans  will  be  implemented 
and  carried  out,  such  as  the  location  of  the  main  operational  office  and 
any  other  offices  used  in  connection  with  the  operation,  the  location  of 
such  ground  equipment  as  seeding  generators,  radar  and  evaluation 
instrumentation,  the  number  and  kinds  of  aircraft  which  will  be  used 
and  the  extent  to  which  weather  data  will  be  made  available  to  the 
licensees  and  other  personnel  carrying  out  the  project ;  and 

(8)  How  conduct  of  the  operation  will  interact  with  other  projects; 
(k)  An  acceptable  plan  for  evaluation  of  the  operation  prepared  in  com- 
pliance with  Rule  7  (1)  (h)  ;  and 

(1)  Such  additional  information  as  will  assist  the  Department  in  de- 
ciding whether  or  not  to  issue  the  permit. 

Procedure  for  Issuance. — The  Department  shall  evaluate  all  fully  executed 
applications,  using  not  only  information  derived  from  the  completed  application 
forms  and  accompanying  (hem,  but  also  such  other  relevant  data  about  the 
applicants  and  the  proposed  operations  as  it  possesses  or  discovers.  The  Depart- 


681 


ment  may  give  public  notice  by  newspaper,  radio  or  television  announcement  in 
the  area'  of  the  State  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected  by  operations  con- 
ducted under  a  permit  that  it  is  considering  an  application  or  more  than  one 
application  for  a  permit,  and  may  hold  a  public  hearing  for  the  purpose  of  ob- 
taining information  from  the  public  concerning  the  effects  of  issuing  or  refusing 
to  issue  the  permit.  The  Department  may  issue  a  permit  in  response  to  an  ap- 
plication for  an  operation  if  it  determines  that  there  has  been  substantial  com- 
pliance with  Section  17  of  the  Act  and  Rule  7(1).  Otherwise  it  shall  deny  the 
application  for  the  permit.  The  Department  shall  complete  its  action  upon  ap- 
plications within  thirty  days  of  receiving  them. 

4.  Conditions  and  Limits  of  Permits. — The  permittee  shall  confine  weather 
modification  activities  within  the  conditions  and  limits  specified  in  the  permit 
and  those  imposed  by  the  Act  and  these  Rules,  except  to  the  extent  the  condi- 
tions and  limits  are  modified  by  the  Department.  The  Department  may  con- 
dition and  limit  permits  as  to  target  area,  time  of  the  operation,  materials  and 
methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation,  emergency  shutdown  procedure 
and  such  other  operational  requirements  as  may  be  established  by  the  Depart- 
ment. The  Department  shall  condition  and  limit  all  permits  in  the  following 
respects : 

(a)  A  permit  may  cover  only  one  operation  ; 

(b)  When  an  operation  is  conducted  under  contract,  a  separate  permit 
is  required  for  each  contract ;  and 

(c)  Only  one  permit  will  be  issued  at  a  time  for  operations  in  any  geo- 
graphical area  if  two  or  more  operations  conducted  within  the  conditions 
and  limits  of  the  permits  might  adversely  interfere  with  each  other. 

5.  Duration  of  Permit. — Within  thirty  days  of  the  end  of  each  yearly  permit 
period  the  permittee  shall  file  a  permit  application  form  available  from  the 
Department,  an  original  for  the  Department  and  a  copy  thereof  for  the  Chair- 
man of  the  Board,  at  the  address  of  the  Department.  The  Department  shall 
complete  its  action  upon  applications  within  thirty  days  of  receiving  them. 

6.  Proof  of  Financial  Responsibility. — Proof. of  financial  responsibility  is  made 
by  showing  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Department  that  the  permittee  has  the 
ability  to  respond  in  damages  to  liability  which  might  reasonably  result  from  the 
operation  for  which  the  permit  is  sought.  Such  proof  of  financial  responsibility 
may,  but  shall  not  be  required  to  be,  shown  by  : 

(a)  Presentation  to  the  Department  of  proof  of  purchase  of  a  prepaid  non- 
cancellable  insurance  policy  or  a  corporate  surety  bond  issued  by  a  company 
approved  by  the  Department  against  whom  service  of  legal  process  may  be 
made  in  Illinois  against  such  liabilities  in  an  amount  ten  times  the  value 
of  an  operation  conducted  under  contract  or  in  an  amount  ten  times  the 
estimated  costs  of  an  operation  not  conducted  under  contract ;  or 

(b)  Depositing  with  the  Department  cash  or  negotiable  securities  in  an 
amount  ten  times  the  value  of  an  operation  conducted  under  contract  or  in 
an  amount  five  times  the  estimated  costs  of  an  operation  not  conducted 
under  contract. 

7.  Renewal  of  Permit. — At  the  expiration  of  the  permit  period,  the  Department 
shall  issue  a  renewal  permit  to  each  applicant  who  : 

(a)  At  least  thirty  clays  before  expiration  of  the  permit  period  files  the 
original  of  a  permit  application  form  available  from  the  Department  with 
the  Department  and  a  copy  with  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  at  the  Depart- 
ment's address ; 

(b)  Meets  the  criteria  for  issuance  of  a  permit  under  Section  17  of  the  Act 
and  Rule  7(1),  including  payment  of  the  permit  fee ;  and 

(c)  Has  an  operational  record  which  indicates  that  an  original  permit 
would  be  issuable  for  the  operation. 

RULE  8 — RECORDS 

1.  Daily  Log. — Each  permittee  must  fill  in  and  retain  a  daily  log  of  weather 
modification  activities  for  each  unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus  used 
during  an  operation.  The  log  form  which  will  be  available  from  the  Department 
requires : 

(a)  Date  of  the  weather  modification  activity  ; 

(b)  Each  aircraft  flight  track  and  location  of  each  item  of  weather  modi- 
fication apparatus  during  each  modification  mission.  Maps  may  be  used ; 


682 


(c)  Local  time  when  modification  activity  began  and  ended.  For  intermit- 
tent operations,  the  start  and  end  of  the  total  sequence  are  acceptable ; 

(d)  Duration  of  operation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus, 
in  hours  and  minutes ; 

(e)  Description  of  type  of  modification  agent  used  ; 

(f)  Rate  of  dispersal  of  agent  during  the  period  of  actual  operation  of 
weather  modification  apparatus,  by  hour  or  other  appropriate  time  period ; 

(g)  Total  amount  of  modification  agent  used.  If  more  th,an  one  agent  was 
used,  report  total  for  each  type  separately  ; 

(h)  Local  time  when  any  radar  monitoring  operation  was  turned  on  and 
turned  off; 

(i)  Type  of  clouds  modified,  that  is  whether  they  were  stratiform,  isolated 
cumuliform.  organized  cumuliform  or  other  types  of  clouds ; 

(j)  Remarks  indicating  such  operational  problems  as  equipment  failure, 
weather  conditions  not  conducive  to  successful  performance  of  the  operation, 
personnel  problems  and  the  like  ;  and 

(k)  Monthly  totals  from  daily  logs  listing  the  total : 

(1)  Days  during  month  in  which  operation  conducted  ; 

( 2 )  Time  of  operation  ; 

(3)  Amount  of  each  kind  of  agent  used  ; 

(4)  Average  rate  of  dispersal  of  each  kind  of  agent  used; 

(5)  Time  of  operation  of  radar ;  and 

(6)  Days  of  each  type  of  cloud  treated. 

2.  Weather  Records. — Each  permittee  must  obtain  and  retain  copies  of  all  daily 
precipitation  total  records  available  from  the  National  Weather  Service  stations 
in  the  target  area  and  other  sources. 

3.  Summary  Records. — Each  permittee  must  prepare  a  monthly  summary  of 
the  monthly  totals  from  the  daily  logs  of  all  units  of  weather  modification  ap- 
paratus used  during  an  operation. 

4.  Addresses  of  Participants. — Each  permittee  must  keep  a  roster  of  the  names 
and  Illinois  addresses  of  all  employees  participating  in  the  State  on  an  operation 
for  which  a  permit  has  been  issued. 

5.  Inspection. — Duly  authorized  agents  of  the  Department  shall  have  the  power 
to  enter  and  inspect  the  records  required  by  this  Rule  and  to  make  copies  of  them. 

6.  Exempted  Weather  Modification  Activities. — The  Department  may  in  its 
discretion  require  persons  operating  weather  modification  activities  exempted 
under  Rule  5  (2)  to  keep  all  or  part  of  the  record  required  of  permittees  by  this 
Rule.  These  records  shall  be  kept  in  such  manner  as  the  Department  may 
indicate. 

RULE  9 — REPORTS 

1.  Monthly. — Within  ten  days  after  the  conclusion  of  each  calendar  month  the 
permittee  shall  submit  a  report  to  the  Department  which  shall  consist  of: 

( a )  A  copy  of  the  summary  record  prepared  under  Rule  8(3); 

(b)  A  copy  of  the  roster  of  the  names  and  Illinois  addresses  of  all  em- 
ployees participating  in  the  State  on  an  operation  which  was  prepared 
under  Rule  8(4)  ; 

(c)  A  copy  of  the  federal  interim  activity  report  form  filed  for  that  month 
with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  in  accordance 
with  the  rules  adopted  under  the  authority  of  Public  Law  92-205;  and 

(d)  A  narrative  account  of  the  manner  in  which  operations  during  the 
month  did  not  conform  to  the  operational  plan  filed  in  accordance  with  Rule 
7  (2)  (j). 

2.  Pinal. — Within  thirty  days  after  completion  of  the  operation  the  permittee 
shall  file  with  the  Department  a  final  report  on  the  operation  which  shall  consist 

of: 

(a)  Copies  of  the  logs  prepared  in  accordance  with  Rule  8  (1),  of  the 
weather  records  obtained  in  accordance  with  Rule  8  (2)  and  of  the  totals 
for  the  entire  operational  period  from  the  monthly  summary  records  pre- 
pared under  Rule  8  (3)  ; 

(b)  A  copy  of  the  federal  final  activity  report  form  filed  with  the  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  in  accordance  with  the  rules 
adopted  under  the  authority  of  Public  Law  92-205  ;  and 

(c)  A  narrative  account  of  the  manner  in  which  the  operation  did  not 
conform  to  the  operational  plan  filed  in  accordance  with  Rule  7  (2)  (j). 


683 


3.  Evaluation. — Within  sixty  days  after  completion  of  the  operation  the  per- 
mittee shall  file  with  the  Department  a  narrative  evaluation  of  the  operation.  The 
data  for  this  report  should  be  assembled  and  evaluated  in  accordance  with  the 
evaluation  plan  prepared  in  compliance  with  Rule  7  (1)  (h). 

4.  Reports  to  Sponsors. — The  permittee  shall  file  with  the  Department  a  copy 
of  all  reports  made  by  the  permittee  to  sponsors  of  the  operation. 

5.  Exempted  Weather  Modification  Activities. — The  Department  may  in  its 
discretion  require  persons  operating  weather  modification  activities  exempted 
under  Rule  5  (2)  but  who  have  been  required  under  Rule  8  (6)  to  keep  certain 
records  to  file  all  or  part  of  the  reports  required  of  permittees  by  this  Rule.  These 
records  shall  be  kept  in  such  manner  as  the  Department  may  indicate. 

6.  Public  Records. — All  reports  which  are  in  the  custody  of  the  Department  and 
which  have  been  filed  with  it  under  the  Act  or  Rule  9  shall  be  kept  open  for  public 
examination  as  public  documents  during  regular  business  hours  of  the  Depart- 
ment's office  located  at  the  Department's  address. 

RULE  10 — PARTIAL  INVALIDITY 

If  any  portion  of  these  Rules  is  held  invalid,  such  invalidity  shall  not  affect 
any  other  part  of  these  Rules  which  can  be  given  effect  without  the  invalid 
portion. 

Kansas 

The  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act 
state  statutes,  rules  and  regulations  plus  applicable  forms 

Prepared  and  Published  by  the  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board,  Suite  303, 
503  Kansas  Avenue,  Topeka,  Kans.  66603 

Preface 

While  rain  making  has  been  one  of  man's  objectives  for  several  thousands  of 
years,  it  has  only  been  within  the  past  half  century  that  he  has  begun  to  grasp 
some  of  the  scientific  reasons  for  weather  events  which  he  has  observed  and 
speculated  on  throughout  history. 

With  a  clear  recognition  of  the  potential  of  weather  modification  for  benefit  or 
harm,  and  in  view  of  the  lack  of  hard  facts  with  respect  to  the  possible  benefits 
and  financial  and  social  costs  of  such  efforts  in  Kansas,  it  appeared  wise  for  the 
state  to  seek  to  provide  usable  knowledge  and  reasonable  protection  to  its  citizens 
against  irresponsible  acts  which  might  adversely  affect  them. 

With  this  in  mind,  the  1974  Kansas  Legislature  passed  H.B.  1216  which  appears 
as  Kansas  Statutes  Annotated  82a-1401  to  1424.  This  act,  cited  as  the  "Kansas 
Weather  Modification  Act,"  provides  for  licensing  by  the  state  of  all  qualified 
persons  who  desire  to  engage  in  weather  modification  activities  within  the  state, 
and  further  requires  that  a  permit  be  obtained  for  each  specific  activity.  Responsi- 
bility for  administering  the  act  has  been  placed  with  the  Kansas  Water  Resources 
Board. 

The  law  also  required  the  Board  to  appoint  an  Advisory  Committee  to  assist 
the  Executive  Director  of  the  Board  in  developing  licensing  standards  and  report 
forms,  and  to  assist  in  other  areas  as  directed  by  the  Board. 

This  booklet  contains  a  copy  of  the  law,  a  copy  of  the  rules  and  regulations 
prepared  in  cooperation  with  the  Advisory  Committee,  a  copy  of  the  required 
forms,  and  instructions  for  preparation  of  the  forms. 

The  objectives  of  the  rules  and  regulations  are  to  encourage  the  development 
and  evaluation  of  weather  modification  technology,  to  protect  the  public  through 
the  requirement  that  operators  in  this  field  possess  certain  basic  qualifications, 
to  establish  procedures  for  the  issuance  of  permits  with  a  minimum  of  delay 
and  to  clarify  administrative  policy. 

These  rules  may  be  amended  in  accordance  with  procedures  set  forth  in  K.S.A. 
77-419. 

To  Whom  Should  A  Weather  Modification  License  and  Permit  Be  Issued? 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION  LICENSE 

The  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act  provides  that  a  license  may  be  issued  to 
any  qualified  person.  That  person  must  be  an  individual.  A  corporation  cannot 


684 


demonstrate  its  knowledge  of  meteorology  and  weather  modification  operations ; 
that  is  the  realm  of  the  individual  who  may  be  a  member  of  a  corporation  or 
political  entity. 

Only  an  individual  can  meet  the  requirements  of  1976  Supp.  K.S.A.  82a-1407 
and  1412.  If  a  company  chooses  to  license  several  of  its  staff  in  order  to  meet  the 
requirements  of  1412,  that  is  its  prerogative.  However,  a  license  is  not  transfer- 
able since  it  applies  to  a  specific  individual  and  his  capabilities. 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION  PERMIT 

In  contrast  to  the  conditions  for  a  license,  a  permit  may  be  obtained  by  an 
individual,  a  corporation,  or  any  other  "person"  which  meets  the  requirements  of 
K.S.A.  82a-1411,  since  all  activities  must  be  under  the  direction  of  a  licensed 
individual.  In  making  application  for  a  permit,  the  licensee  who  will  be  carrying 
out  the  provisions  of  the  permit  should  be  required  to  state  in  writing  that  he 
can  carry  out  the  provisions  of  the  permit  as  specified  in  the  operational  plan 
which  is  to  accompany  the  approved  permit. 

Rules  and  Regulations — General 

98-4-1  PURPOSE 

These  rules  and  regulations  were  prepared  pursuant  to  K.S.A.  82a-1403  by  the 
Executive  Director  within  the  authority  granted  by  the  Kansas  Water  Resources 
Board  and  in  consultation  with  the  Advisory  Committee  appointed  by  the  Board. 
The  purpose  of  developing  licensing  standards  and  report  forms  and  establishing 
minimum  operating  requirements  for  weather  modification  activities  in  Kansas 
is  to  expand  knowledge,  minimize  conflicts,  and  assure  the  use  of  the  most  effec- 
tive methods  of  carrying  on  such  operations.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

98-4-2  DEFINITIONS 

1.  "Board"  means  the  Kansas  Water  Resources  Board. 

2.  "Director"  means  the  Executive  Director  of  the  Kansas  Water  Resources 
Board. 

3.  "Emergency"  means  an  unusual  condition  which  could  not  have  reasonably 
been  expected  or  foreseen ;  one  in  which  it  can  be  anticipated  that  damage  can  be 
avoided  or  reduced  by  prompt  weather  modification  action. 

4.  "License"  means  the  document  issued  by  the  Director  to  qualified  persons 
who  make  application  therefor,  authorizing  such  persons  to  engage  in  weather 
modification  activities  in  Kansas. 

5.  "Licensee"  means  an  individual  who  has  applied  for  and  to  whom  a  weather 
modification  license  has  been  issued. 

6.  "Permit"  means  the  document  issued  by  the  Director  authorizing  weather 
modification  activity  in  Kansas,  which  describes  the  objectives  of  the  activity,  the 
area  in  which  the  activity  is  to  take  place,  the  time  within  which  the  operation 
is  to  be  active,  and  anticipated  results. 

7.  "Primary  Target  Area"  means  the  area  within  which  weather  modification 
activity  is  intended  to  have  an  effect. 

8.  "Research  and  Development"  means  exploration,  field  experimentation 
and/or  extension  of  investigative  findings  and  theories. 

9.  "Weather  Modification  Activity"  means  any  operation  or  experimental 
process  which  lias  as  its  objective  inducing  change,  bv  artificial  means,  in  the 
composition,  behavior,  or  dynamics  of  the  atmosphere.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403. 

98-4-3  LICENSING 

1.  No  person  may  engage  in  any  weather  modification  activity  within  the  State 
of  Kansas  without  a  license  and  a  permit. 

2.  In  order  to  obtain  a  license  under  the  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act  the 
applicant  must : 

a.  Make  application  for  a  license  in  Kansas  to  the  Board  on  Form  KWM 
#1.  (Copy  attached)  To  assure  timely  consideration,  this  should  be  sub- 
mitted at  least  forty-five  (45)  days  prior  to  the  start  of  the  proposed  opera- 
tional period. 


685 


b.  Pay  the  $100.00  license  fee  unless  that  fee  is  waived  by  a  decision  of  the 
Board  because  of  the  educational  or  experimental  nature  of  the  work  pro- 
posed. The  candidate  for  exemption  must  prove  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
Director  and  the  Advisory  Committee,  if  consulted,  that  the  nature  of  the 
work  merits  exemption  from  fees. 

c.  Meet  one  of  the  following  professional  or  educational  requirements  : 

(1)  Eight  (8)  years  of  professional  experience  in  weather  modifica- 
tion field  research  or  activities  and  at  least  three  (3)  years  as  a  project 
director, 

(2)  A  baccalaureate  degree  in  applicable  courses  and  three  (3)  years 
experience  in  application  of  such  studies  to  weather  modification 
activities. 

(3)  A  baccalaureate  degree  including  25  hours  of  meteorological 
studies  and  two  (2)  years  of  practical  experience  in  weather  modifica- 
tion research  or  activities. 

d.  Demonstrate,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Director,  by  his  knowledge  of 
meteorology,  cloud  physics,  and  field  experience,  that  he  is  qualified  to  con- 
duct a  weather  modification  project  of  the  kind  he  wishes  to  conduct  in 
Kansas. 

3.  Each  license  shall  expire  at  the  end  of  the  calendar  year  for  which  it  is 
issued. 

4.  Weather  modification  licenses  may  be  renewed  annually,  effective  January  1 
each  year.  Renewal  will  be  automatic  upon  the  following  conditions : 

a.  Receipt  of  a  request  for  renewal  by  the  license  holder. 

b.  Receipt  of  the  $100.00  annual  license  fee,  if  applicable. 

c.  Verification  by  the  Director  or  the  Board  that  evidence  has  not  become 
available  that  would  raise  doubts  as  to  the  qualifications  of  the  license  holder. 
K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

©8-4-4  PERMITS 

1.  A  weather  modification  permit  shall  be  required  annually,  on  a  calendar  year 
basis,  for  each  weather  modification  project.  In  those  cases  when  a  weather  modi- 
fication activity  will  extend  over  more  than  one  calendar  year,  a  permit  may  be 
extended  on  a  year-to-year  basis  upon  payment  of  the  annual  fee,  a  review  by  the 
Director  and,  if  desirable,  his  Advisory  Committee,  and  the  publication  of  a  no- 
tice of  intent  to  continue  the  operation.  The  Director  shall  determine  whether  a 
public  hearing  is  needed. 

2.  A  permit  may  not  be  assigned  nor  transferred  by  the  holder. 

3.  Permit  applications  should,  if  possible,  be  submitted  at  least  forty-five  (45) 
days  prior  to  the  initial  date  of  the  proposed  operational  period  for  which  the 
permit  is  sought.  This  will  allow  time  to  hold  a  public  hearing,  review  the  infor- 
mation presented,  and  permit  action  by  the  Board  prior  to  the  proposed  starting 
date  of  the  project. 

4.  In  order  to  modify  the  boundaries  of  a  project  for  which  a  permit  has  previ- 
ously been  obtained,  a  revised  permit  will  be  required,  under  conditions  similar 
to  those  under  which  the  original  permit  was  issued,  or  as  modified  by  the 
Director. 

5.  In  order  to  obtain  a  permit  to  conduct  weather  modification  activities  in  Kan- 
sas, an  applicant  must : 

a.  Submit  to  the  Director  a  completed  Form  KWM  No.  2.  (Copy  attached.) 

b.  Pay  the  $100.00  permit  fee,  if  applicable. 

c.  Present  evidence  that  the  applicant  is,  or  has  in  its  employ,  a  licensee. 

d.  Demonstrate  proof  of  ability  to  meet  the  liability  requirements  of  Sec- 
tion 1411(4)  of  the  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act.  This  proof  may  be  pro- 
vided in  the  form  of  an  insurance  policy  written  by  a  company  authorized  to 
do  business  in  Kansas  or  by  a  statement  of  individual  worth  which  is  satis- 
factory to  the  Director. 

e.  Submit  a  complete  and  satisfactory  operational  plan  for  the  proposed 
weather  modification  project,  which  includes  : 

(1)  A  map  of  the  proposed  operating  area  which  specifies  the  primary 
target  area  and  shows  the  area  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected. 

(2)  The  name  and  address  of  the  licensee. 

(3)  The  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  weather  modification  activi- 
ties. 

(4)  The  meteorological  criteria  to  be  used  to  initiate  or  suspend  modifi- 
cation activities. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  46 


686 


(5)  The  person  or  organization  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted. 

(6)  A  statement  showing  any  expected  effect  upon  the  environment. 

(7)  The  methods  that  will  be  used  in  determining  and  evaluating  the 
proposed  weather  modification  project. 

(8)  Such  other  information  as  may  be  required  by  the  Director. 

f.  Publish  a  "notice  of  intent"  to  engage  in  weather  modification  activities 
in  each  county  of  which  all  or  part  may  be  within  the  primary  target  area  or 
within  the  areas  reasonably  expected  to  be  affected,  at  least  seven  (7)  days 
prior  to  the  required  public  hearing.  The  time  and  place  of  the  public  hearing 
must  be  approved  by  the  Director.  The  "notice  of  intent"  shall  include  notice 
in  a  newspaper  or  newspapers  of  general  circulation  in  the  area.  In  addition, 
the  use  of  radio  and  television  spot  announcements  is  encouraged.  The  notice 
shall : 

(1)  Describe  the  primary  target  area. 

(2)  Describe  the  area  which  might  reasonably  be  affected. 

(3)  Specify  the  period  of  operation  including  starting  and  ending 
dates,  which  operation  need  not  be  continuous. 

(4)  Describe  the  general  method  of  operation. 

(5)  Describe  the  intended  effect  of  the  operation. 

(6)  State  the  time  and  place  of  a  public  hearing  on  the  application; 
the  hearing  to  be  in  or  near  the  primary  target  area. 

(7)  State  that  complete  details  of  the  application  for  a  permit  will  be 
available  for  examination  in  the  office  of  the  Water  Resources  Board  in 

Topeka  and  at  a  location  within  the  project  area  as  described  in  the 
public  hearing  notice. 

g.  Provide  satisfactory  evidence  of  publication  of  the  "notice  of  intent"  to 
the  Director  prior  to  the  public  hearing. 

6.  At  the  discretion  of  the  Director,  additional  information  may  be  required  of 
the  applicant.  The  additional  information  required  may  include  a  comprehen- 
sive environmental  impact  analysis  similar  to  the  statements  required  for  federal 
projects. 

7.  Any  permit  issued  for  a  weather  modification  activity  shall  be  subject  to  re- 
vision, suspension,  or  modification  of  its  terms  and  conditions  by  the  Director,  if 
necessary  to  protect  the  health,  safety,  or  property  of  any  person  or  to  protect  the 
environment.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

98-4-5  EVALUATION  OF  PERMIT  APPLICATION 

Permit  applications  will  be  evaluated  based  on  the  following  considerations : 

1.  The  project  can  reasonably  be  expected  to  benefit  the  residents  of  the  primary 
target  area  or  an  important  segment  of  the  state's  population. 

2.  The  testimony  and  information  presented  at  the  public  hearing  is  generally 
favorable  to  the  proposed  activity. 

3.  Economic,  social,  or  research  benefits  are  expected : 

a.  If  the  application  is  for  a  commercial  project,  the  project  is  scientifically 
and  technically  feasible. 

b.  If  the  application  is  for  a  scientific  or  research  project,  it  offers  promise 
of  expanding  the  knowledge  and  technology  of  weather  modification. 

4.  The  applicant  has  provided  adequate  safeguards  against  potentially  hazard- 
ous effects  to  health,  property,  or  environment  and  has  outlined  a  program  for 
the  implementation  of  these  safeguards. 

5.  The  proposed  project  will  not  have  any  detrimental  effect  on  the  previously 
authorized  weather  modification  projects. 

G.  The  project  is  to  be  under  the  personal  direction,  on  a  day-to-day  basis,  of 
an  individual  who  holds  a  valid  license,  issued  under  the  Kansas  Weather  Modifi- 
cation Act.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

9  8-4-6  REPORTS 

1.  The  permit  holder  will  maintain  at  his  project  office  a  current  (within  24 
hours)  log  of  all  operations.  This  log  must  he  available  for  inspection  by  persons 


i 


687 


so  authorized  by  the  Director.  The  log  will  include  information  at  least  equiva- 
lent to  that  on  Form  KWM  No.  3.  (Copy  attached) 

2.  Reports  of  weather  modification  activities  under  the  permit  will  be  made 
monthly  to  the  Director  for  each  calendar  month  for  which  the  permit  is  valid. 
These  should  be  submitted  by  the  15th  day  of  the  following  month.  Copies  of  all 
entries  made  on  Weather  Modification  Form  KWM  No.  3  shall  be  submitted  when 
making  these  reports  unless  a  more  detailed  form  is  agreed  to  at  the  time  the 
permit  is  granted. 

3.  - A  preliminary  report  shall  be  made  within  thirty  (30)  days  after  the  end  of 
each  calendar  year  or  within  thirty  (30)  days  after  the  end  of  the  project,  which- 
ever comes  first,  with  a  final  report  on  the  project  submitted  not  later  than  ninety 
(90)  days  following  the  end  of  the  project.  These  reports  shall  include  : 

a.  Monthly  and  project  period  totals  for  information  required  on  Form 
KWM  No.  3. 

b.  The  permit  holder's  interpretation  of  project  effects  as  compared  to 
those  anticipated  in  the  original  application  for  the  permit.  K.S.A.  1974 
Supp.  82a-1403 

98-4-7  PROCEDURE  FOR  GRANTING  EMERGENCY  PERMITS 

1.  A  permit  may  be  granted  on  an  emergency  basis  through  the  waiving  of 
regular  rules  of  procedure  when  evidence  is  presented  that  clearly  identifies  the 
situation  as  an  emergency  as  defined  in  98-4-2  (3) . 

2.  Upon  presentation  of  evidence  satisfactory  to  the  Director  that  a  condition 
exists  or  may  reasonably  be  expected  to  exist  in  the  very  near  future  that  may 
be  alleviated  or  overcome  by  weather  modification  activities,  the  Director  shall 
issue  a  permit  *o  an  individual  holding  a  license  issued  under  this  Act.  Coincident 
with  the  issuance  of  the  permit,  the  Director  shall  also  release  to  the  news  media 
in  the  area  intended  to  be  affected,  the  information  contained  in  the  permit. 

3.  Within  ten  (10)  days  after  the  granting  of  an  emergency  permit,  and  if 
the  permittee  desires  to  continue  his  activities,  the  Director  shall  set  a  date  for 
a  public  hearing  and  the  permittee  will  provide  public  notice  of  such  hearing 
through  the  regular  news  media  in  the  area.  At  the  public  meeting,  the  permittee 
shall  describe : 

a.  The  objectives  of  the  emergency  action. 

b.  The  success  to  date. 

c.  His  future  plans  under  the  permit. 

On  the  basis  of  the  information  presented  at  this  public  hearing  and  the  re- 
sponse of  the  local  people,  the  Director  will  then  decide  whether  to  revoke  the 
emergency  permit,  modify  it,  or  permit  its  continued  operation  under  conditions 
specified  by  the  Director.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

98-4-8  PROCEDURE  FOR  SUSPENSION  OR  REVOCATION  OF  PERMITS 

1.  Automatic  Suspension  of  Permit. — Any  weather  modification  permit  issued 
under  the  terms  of  the  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act  will  be  suspended  auto- 
matically if  the  licensee's  weather  modification  license  expires  or  if  the  person 
designated  as  being  in  control  of  the  project  becomes  incapacitated  or  leaves 
the  employment  of  the  permit  holder  and  a  replacement  approved  by  the  Board 
is  not  on  the  job  site.  A  permit  which  is  suspended  for  these  reasons  may  be 
reinstated  by  the  Board  following  renewal  of  the  expired  license  or  submission 
of  an  amended  personnel  statement  nominating  a  person  whose  qualifications  for 
a  license  are  acceptable  to  the  Board. 

2.  Emergency  Suspension  of  a  Permit. — When  an  emergency  exists  or  appears 
imminent,  or  the  Director  has  been  notified  of  a  probable  impending  emergency, 
he  may  order  the  immediate  suspension  of  all  weather  modification  operations 
within  the  area  affected  by  such  condition.  This  notification  shall  be  given  in  the 
most  expeditious  manner.  If  the  telephone  is  used  to  give  this  notice,  it  is  to  be 
followed  promptly  by  a  letter  of  particulars  addressed  to  the  permit  holder  and 
stating  the  time  and  place  for  holding  a  hearing  on  the  question  of  taking  per- 
manent action  on  the  permit  if  the  Director  determines  such  a  hearing  is  neces- 
sary or  desirable.  Whether  or  not  the  permit  is  reinstated  by  the  Director,  and 
when  such  reinstatement  may  take  place,  will  depend  upon  the  conditions  that 
develop  within  the  permit  area  or  when  the  requirements  of  the  Director  are 
met.  Failure  of  the  licensee  to  notify  the  Director  of  an  existing  or  impending 


688 


emergency-  which  should  have  reasonably  been  forseen  may  be  grounds  for  revo- 
cation of  the  permit  and  the  operator's  license.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

98-4-9  PROCEDURE  FOR  SUSPENSION  OR  REVOCATION  OF  LICENSES 

1.  The  Board  may  suspend  or  revoke  any  existing  license  for  the  following 
reasons : 

a.  The  licensee  is  found  not  to  possess  the  qualifications  necessary  to  meet 
the  requirements  of  the  law. 

b.  The  licensee  has  violated  one  or  more  of  the  provisions  of  his  license, 
the  Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act,  or  these  rules. 

c.  It  has  reason  to  believe  that  the  weather  modification  efforts  of  the 
licensee  may  produce  undesirable  effects. 

2.  When  the  Director  has  reason  to  believe  that  a  condition  exists  which  would 
be  a  basis  for  the  suspension  or  revocation  of  a  license,  he  shall  so  inform  the 
Board  with  a  recommendation  for  suspension  or  revocation.  If  the  Board  deter- 
mines that  the  situation  requires  a  hearing,  the  Director  shall,  at  least  thirty 
(30)  days  prior  to  the  meeting  of  the  Board  at  which  the  matter  will  be  con- 
sidered, notify  the  licensee  and  any  other  interested  party  of  the  pending  Board 
action.  The  hearing  shall  be  conducted  as  provided  for  in  the  Kansas  Weather 
Modification  Act. 

The  notice  to  the  licensee  shall  include : 

a.  The  Director's  recommendation  to  the  Board  ; 

b.  The  reasons  for  the  Director's  recommendation  ;  and 

c.  The  time  and  place  of  the  Board  meeting  at  which  the  matter  will  be 
heard.  The  licensee  or  any  other  interested  party  may  attend  the  Board 
meeting  at  which  the  Board  will  make  its  determination  and  may  present 
relevant  evidence  to  the  Board  concerning  the  revocation  or  suspension. 
K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

98-4-10  FIELD  OPERATIONS 

1.  As  provided  under  section  98-4-5,  paragraph  6,  there  shall  be  the  license 
holder  or  a  substitute  approved  by  the  Director  on  duty  at  the  project  site  at 
all  times  while  weather  modification  activities  are  being  carried  out. 

2.  In  order  to  supply  local  guidance  to  eacli  weather  modification  project,  the 
permit  holder  may  seek  the  advice  and  assistance  of  concerned  citizens  within 
the  area  affected  by  weather  modification  activity.  This  group,  which  may  be 
selected  at  the  time  of  the  public  hearing,  must  be  approved  by  the  Director.  This 
local  advisory  group  may  : 

a.  Assist  in  developing  the  operational  plan  ; 

b.  Assist  in  financial  arrangements  ;  and 

c.  Assist  the  Director  in  the  evaluation  of  the  project. 

3.  The  permit  holder  shall  not  conduct  activities  outside  the  limits  stated 
in  the  operational  plan  ( 98-4-4  ( 5e )) .  Activities  planned  for  periods  of  severe 
weather  shall  be  stated  in  the  permit  application  and  identified  at  the  public 
hearing  on  the  application  for  a  permit.  K.S.A.  1974  Supp.  82a-1403 

Kansas  Water  Resources  Board  Form  KWM  No.  1 

Application  for  License  To  Engage  in  Weather  Modification  Activity 
Within  the  State  of  Kansas 

1.  Name  of  applicant  

2.  Business  address  


3.  Applicant  intends  to  do  business  on  an  (individual,  partnership,  consultant, 
employee,  corporation,  other). 

4.  Print  below  the  full  name  and  address  of  all  personnel  to  be  engaged  in 
weather  modification  activities  who  may  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  activities 
for  applicant. 


Full  Name 
(Do  not  use  initials) 


I 

Residence  or  Business  Address 


689 


5.  Has  any  person  listed  under  "Personnel"  been  denied  a  license  to  conduct 

a  license  suspended  or  revoked?  If  so,  attach  a  detailed  statement. 

or  participate  in  weather  modification  activities  in  Kansas  or  elsewhere,  or  had 

6.  Give  the  name,  education,  experience,  and  qualifications  of  the  person  or 
persons  who  may  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  weather  modification  activities. 
(If  more  than  one,  attach  additional  sheets) . 

NAME:    


Course  of  study  Years  or  semester  Graduated  (yes  or  no) 

(major)  hours  and  year  of  graduation 


Junior  College      1  2 

College  or  university   1   2  3  4  (Degree) 

University  graduate  study   (Degree) 

Certificates  of  professional  or  vocational  competence 
or  license. 

Membership  status  in  professional  or  technical 
associations. 

EXPERIENCE  IN  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  OPERATIONS,  EXPERIMENTS,  OR  PLANNING 
[Begin  with  most  recent  experience] 

From  To  Occupations   and    descriptions  of 

duties  (list  each  position  Fmployers  (name,  address,  and 


Month        Year      Month        Year      separately)  type  of  business) 

7.  Special  education  and  experience  qualifications  (publications,  reports, 
awards). 

8.  Specific  type(s)  of  weather  modification  activity  (ies)  which  applicant 
wishes  to  be  licensed  to  perform  (fog  dispersal,  hail  suppression,  rain  augmenta- 
tion, etc.). 

I  certify  that  the  information  contained  in  this  application  is  correct  to  the 
best  of  my  knowledge. 

Signature   Date  

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  or  affirmed  before  me — 
This  day  of  19 

Title 

Notary  Public  in  and  for  the  County  of  ,  State  of 

Form  KWM  No.  2 

Application  for  a  Permit  to  Engage  in  a  Weather  Modification  Activity 
Within  the  State  of  Kansas 

1.  Name  of  applicant  _. 

2.  Business  address  ,  ,  

3.  Person  (s)  who  will  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  activity. 

4.  Kansas  Weather  Modification  License  Number  (s) 

5.  Does  applicant  wish  to  be  considered  exempt  from  fee  requirements  of  the 
Kansas  Weather  Modification  Act  (K.S.A.  82a-1406 ( b ) ) . 

If  so,  give  justification. 

6.  Primary  purpose (s)  of  the  weather  modification  activity  to  be  conducted 
under  the  permit : 

7.  Person  (s)  or  organization  on  whose  behalf  the  proposed  weather  modifica- 
tion activity  is  to  be  conducted  : 

8.  In  accordance  with  the  requirements,  of  K.S.A.  82a-1411(a)  and  the  rules 
and  regulations  applicable  thereto,  the  following  attachments  are  submitted  with 
this  application : 

(a)  Permit  fee  in  the  form  of   . 


(b)  Proof  of  financial  responsibility  in  the  form  of. 

(c)  Proposed  operational  plan. 


(d)  Proposed  Notice  of  Intent  to  engage  in  weather  modification  activities. 


690 


(e)  Contracts  or  agreements  applicable  to  the  conduct  and  execution  of  the 
proposed  weather  modification  activity. 
I  hereby  make  application  for  a  permit  under  the  Kansas  Weather  Modification 
Act.  K.S.A.  82a-1401-1424. 

Signature-    Date  


Instructions  for  Completing  Daily  Log  Form  KWM  No.  3 

This  form  is  suitable  for  recording  the  operation  of  individual  items  of-«irborne 
<»i-  ground-based  equipment.  For  clarity,  a  separate  log  should  be  kept  for  each 
such  piece  of  equipment.  (Each  aircraft,  ground  generator,  etc.)  In  order  to  avoid 
duplication  of  effort,  daily  log  forms  required  by  federal  regulations  may  be  used 
in  hen  of  this  form,  if  the  following  instructions  are  carried  out  in  completing 
the  federal  forms. 


691 


A.  A  separate  seeding  event,  requiring  entries  in  all  appropriate  columns,  shall 
be  logged  whenever : 

(a)  The  cloud  or  cloud  system  being  modified  can  reasonably  be  considered 
unaffected  by  previous  release  of  seeding  agents  (Col.  2). 

(b)  The  time  since  the  last  release  of  seeding  agent  exceeds  one  hour  (Col. 
3  and  4). 

(c)  The  type  of  seeding  agent  used,  or  its  rate  of  application,  is  changed 
(Col.  6  and  7). 

(d)  The  cloud  form  being  seeded  changes  (Col.  9-12). 

B.  Explanation  of  column  entries. 

Col.  (1)  :  Give  date  by  calendar  month  and  day. 

Col.  (2)  :  Give  aircraft  position  or  location  of  ground-based  equipment. 
Aircraft  position  may  use  VOR-DME  or  be  given  in  miles  (10  statute  miles  or 
less)  from  nearby  towns  or  landmarks,  (e.g.  7  miles  SSE  of  Tribune). 

Col.  (3  and  4)  :  State  local  time  when  modification  activity  began  and 
ended.  Use  24-hour  clock  time  (e.g.,  0100  signifies  1:00  A.M.  and  2300  sig- 
nifies 11 :00  P.M. ) .  For  intermittent  operations,  the  start  and  end  of  the 
total  sequence  are  acceptable. 

Col.  (5)  :  Give  duration  of  operation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification 
apparatus,  in  hours  and  minutes.  (Col.  5=Col.  4— Col.  3). 

Col.  (6)  :  Describe  seeding  agent  used,  such  as  silver  iodide  pyrotechnic 
flares,  silver  iodide  in  acetone  solution,  sodium  chloride,  liquid  urea,  dry  ice, 
etc. 

Col.  (7)  :  Give  rate  of  dispersal  of  seeding  agent  in  gm./min.,  lbs./min.  or 
other  appropriate  units. 
Col.  (8)  :  Give  total  amount  of  seeding  agent  used. 

Col.  (9-12)  :  Identify  the  predominant  cloud  or  precipitation  type  being 
modified,  such  as  snow  or  rain  from  stratiform  clouds,  rain  or  hail  from 
cumuliform  clouds,  etc. 

C.  On  the  daily  log  sheet  for  the  last  day  of  each  month,  give  monthly  totals 
for  Columns  (2,  5,  8,  and  9-12) . 

North  Dakota 

North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board 

rules  and  regulations  relating  to  weather  modification  operations  and  rules 
of  practice  and  procedure  pertaining  to  hearings  before  the  board 

(Adopted  on  July  1,  1976,  North  Dakota  Century  Code  Chapter  2-07— Weather 

Modification) 

State  of  North  Dakota, 
Bismarck,  N.  Dak,,  May  18, 1976. 

Mr.  Martin  R.  Shock, 

Director,  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board,  Bismarck,  N.D. 

Dear  Mr.  Shock  :  We  have  examined  the  proposed  regulations  titled  "Rules 
and  Regulations  of  the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board"  and  "Rules 
of  Practice  and  Procedure  Before  the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board" 
which  you  submitted  to  this  office  by  your  letter  of  April  30,  1976.  From  our 
examination,  it  is  our  opinion  that  when  they  have  been  duly  adopted  by  the 
Weather  Modification  Board,  and  filed  in  accordance  with  Chapter  28-32  of  the 
North  Dakota  Century  Code,  they  will  be  valid  and  binding  regulations  having 
the  force  and  effect  of  law. 
Sincerely, 

Allen  I.  Olson, 
Attorney  General. 

Rules  and  Regulations  of  the  North  Dakota 
Weather  Modification  Board 

r2-07-01  general  provisions 

01.100  Scope :  These  regulations  are  promulgated  pursuant  to  Chapter  2-07  of 
the  North  Dakota  Century  Code  and  shall  apply  to  any  weather  modification 
operation  conducted  wholly  or  partially  within  the  state  of  North  Dakota.  These 
regulations  shall  be  applied  in  conjunction  with  Chapter  2-07. 


692 


01.200  Definitions  :  As  used  in  these  regulations,  the  following  words  shall  have 
the  meaning  given  to  them  below  unless  otherwise  made  inappropriate  by  use 
and  context.  Words  not  defined  in  this  section  shall  have  the  meaning  given  to 
them  in  Chapter  2-07. 

01.201  "Act"  shall  mean  Chapter  2-07  of  the  North  Dakota  Century  Code. 

01.202  "Applicant"  shall  mean  any  person  who  applies  for  a  professional 
weather  modification  license  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  the  Act  and  these 
regulations. 

01.203  "Board"  shall  mean  the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board. 

01.204  "Director"  shall  mean  the  Executive  Director  of  the  North  Dakota 
Weather  Modification  Board. 

01.205  "License"  shall  mean  a  weather  modification  license  issued  under  these 
regulations  and  Section  2-07-03.3  of  the  Act. 

01.206  "Licensee"  shall  mean  a  person  to  whom  a  license  has  been  issued. 

01.207  "Permit"  shall  mean  a  weather  modification  permit  issued  under  these 
regulations  and  Section  2-07-04  of  the  Act. 

01.208  "Permittee"  shall  mean  a  person  to  whom  a  permit  has  been  issued. 

01.209  "Operations  area"  shall  mean  an  area  in  which  weather  modification 
operations  are  conducted. 

01.210  "Target  area"  shall  mean  an  area  in  which  the  effects  of  weather  modifi- 
cation are  desired. 

01.211  "Weather  modification  apparatus"  shall  mean  any  device  used  to  dis- 
pense any  chemical  material  used  to  modify  any  weather  condition. 

01.300  Administration  :  Except  as  otherwise  provided  in  Sections  05.204  and 
10.203  of  these  regulations,  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  Board  shall  be  exercised 
by  the  Director  and  such  other  persons  as  he  may  direct. 

R2-07-02  EXEMPT  ACTIVITIES 

02.100  Notice  to  Board  :  Any  person  intending  to  conduct  any  exempt  activities 
under  the  provisions  of  Section  2-07-03.1  of  the  Act  shall  furnish  notice  of  such 
intention  to  the  Board  at  least  thirty  (30)  days  prior  to  the  time  such  activities 
are  to  begin.  Notice  shall  consist  of  the  following  information  and  such  other 
information  as  the  Board  deems  necessary. 

02.101  Name  and  address  of  the  person  giving  notice  ; 

02.202  Name  and  address  of  the  person  who  will  conduct  the  activity ; 

02.203  A  description  of  the  procedures  to  be  used  in  the  operation  or  the  re- 
search and  development ; 

02.204  A  description  of  the  object  of  the  activity  : 

02.205  The  legal  description  of,  and  a  map  showing  the  area  of,  the  operations 
area  and  target  area,  if  any  ; 

02.206  The  date  upon  which  the  activity  is  to  commence  and  its  approximate 
duration ;  and 

02.207  A  description  of  the  equipment  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  activity. 

02.20K  Approval  of  Exempt  Activities :  No  weather  modification  activity  in- 
tended to  be  conducted  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  Section  2-07-03.1  of  the 
Act  shall  be  commenced  without  prior  approval  of  the  Board  if  such  activity  is 
to  be  conducted  in  the  out-of-doors  with  weather  modification  apparatus.  The 
Board  may  approve  only  those  activities  which  provide  for  the  protection  of  the 
health,  safety  and  welfare  of  those  persons  who  may  be  affected  by  such  activ- 
ities, and  which  otherwise  comply  with  the  provisions  of  Section  2-07-03.1. 

R2-07-03  ACQUISITION  OF  LICENSE 

03.100  License  Required:  Every  person  intending  to  conduct  operations  in  this 
state  shall  designate  to  the  Board,  on  forms  furnished  by  the  Board,  at  least  one 
natural  person  who  shall  at  all  times  be  physically  present  during  all  operations 
for  which  a  permit  is  required  and  who  will  be  in  control  of  such  operations. 

03.200  Criteria  for  Issuance:  The  competence  of  any  applicant  to  engage  in 
weather  modification  operations  shall  be  demonstrated  to  the  Board  pursuant 
to  Section  2-07-03.3  of  the  Act  upon  the  showing  that  the  natural  person  desig- 
nated by  the  applicant  pursuant  to  Section  03.100  has : 

03.201  A  minimum  of  one  year  of  field  experience  in  the  management  and  con- 
trol of  weather  modification  operations  or  research  ;  and 

06.202  One  of  the  following  requirements  : 

(l)Four  additional  years  experience  in  weather  modification  operations 
or  research  ;  or 


693 


(2)  A  degree  in  mathematics,  engineering,  or  the  physical  sciences,  plus 
two  years  additional  experience  in  weather  modification  operations  or  re- 
search ;  or 

(3)  A  degree  in  meteorology:  or  a  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics,  or 
the  physical  sciences  which  includes  at  least  twenty-five  semester  hours  of 
course  work  in  meteorology. 

In  determining  competency,  the  Board  may  also  consider  any  other  items  to  be 
set  forth  in  a  license  application  pursuant  to  Section  03.300. 

03.300  Application  Procedure :  An  applicant  for  a  license  shall  apply  to  the 
Board  on  forms  supplied  by  the  Board.  The  forms  may  require  relevant  informa- 
tion about  the  knowledge  and  experience  of  the  applicant  and  the  natural  person 
designated  under  Section  03.100,  and  shall  include  the  following : 

03.301  Educational  background,  at  the  college  and  graduate  level  of  both 
the  natural  person  designated  by  the  applicant  and  the  other  employees  of  the 
applicant.  This  includes  the  dates  of  attendance  and  of  graduation,  the  major 
and  minor  subjects  (including  the  number  of  semester  hours  of  meteorological 
course  work),  the  degrees  received,  and  the  titles  of  any  thesis  and/or  dis- 
sertation. 

03.302  Experience  in  weather  modification  or  related  activities  of  both  the 
natural  person  designated  by  the  applicant  and  the  other  employees  of  the 
applicant.  Attention  should  be  given  to  experience  with  reference  to  meteorological 
conditions  typical  of  North  Dakota.  The  applicant  should  list  the  dates  of  each 
position  held  by  the  natural  person  designated  pursuant  to  Section  03.100,  the 
title  of  the  position  (indicate  whether  it  was  of  subprofessional  or  professional 
level),  the  name  and  address  of  the  employer,  a  description  of  the  work  done 
(indicate  both  the  magnitude  and  complexity  of  the  work  and  the  duties  and 
degree  of  responsibility  for  the  work),  and  the  name  and  address  of  the  super- 
visor. 

03.303  Scientific  or  engineering  society  affiliations  of  the  natural  person  desig- 
nated by  the  applicant  and  the  grade  of  membership  in  and  certification  by  each. 

03.304  Publications,  patents  and  reports  of  the  natural  person  designated  by  the 
applicant. 

03.303  Three  references  who  will  attest  to  such  natural  person's  character, 
knowledge  and  experience. 

03.306  A  list  of  all  jurisdictions  in  which  the  applicant  has  previously  filed 
application  for  a  professional  weather  modification  license.  The  results  of  the, 
applications  should  be  indicated. 

03.307  Indication  whether  a  professional  weather  modification  license  issued 
to  the  applicant  in  any  jurisdiction  has  ever  been  suspended  or  revoked  or 
whether  there  has  been  refusal  to  renew  such  a  license  by  any  jurisdiction. 
If  the  answer  is  yes.  the  circumstances  must  be  explained  in  detail. 

03.400  Procedure  for  Issuance :  The  Board  shall  evaluate  the  applications, 
including  responses  from  any  references  given  by  the  applicant.  On  the  basis 
of  all  such  information  the  Board  shall,  within  thirty  days  of  receipt  of  an 
application,  determine  whether  the  natural  person  designated  by  the  license 
applicant  under  Section  03.100  meets  the  education  and  experience  criteria 
established  by  subsections  03.201  and  03.202  and  whether  such  person  and  the 
applicant  possess  the  knowledge  and  experience  necessary  to  engage  in  weather 
modification  operations  and  shall  issue  a  license  to  the  applicant  who  satisfies 
the  requirements  of  these  regulations  and  Section  2-07-03.3  of  the  Act.  If  an 
applicant  for  a  license  or  the  natural  person  designated  by  the  applicant  do  not 
satisfy  any  of  such  requirements,  the  Board  shall  deny  the  license. 

03.500  Renewal  of  License :  Forty-five  days  before  expiration  of  licenses,  the 
Board  shall  mail  license  application  forms  to  all  licensees  and  request  each 
licensee  to  complete  the  form  and  file  the  original  with  the  Board.  The  Board 
shall  evaluate  the  available  data  about  the  licensee  and  the  natural  person  desig- 
nated by  the  license  applicant  under  Section  03.100  and  shall  issue  a  renewal 
license  within  thirty  days  of  receipt  of  the  application  to  each  applicant  who 
pays  the  license  fee  established  by  Section  2-07-03.3(1)  of  the  Act  and  who  has 
the  qualifications  necessary  for  issuance  of  an  original  license.  The  Board  shall 
deny  a  renewal  license  within  thirty  days  of  receipt  of  the  application  of  each 
applicant  who  does  not  pay  the  renewal  fee  or  who  does  not  possess  the  qualifi- 
cations necessary  for  issuance  of  an  original  license  or  who  does  not  designate 
a  natural  person,  pursuant  to  Section  03.100,  who  satisfies  the  requirements 
of  Section  03.200. 


694 


03.600  Responsibility  of  Controller:  The  natural  person  designated  by  the 
license  applicant  under  Section  03.100  is  deemed  by  the  Board  to  be  in  control 
of  and  primarily  responsible  for  operations  conducted  under  the  terms  of  any 
permit.  However  nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  appropriate 
enforcement  of  any  regulation,  limitation,  permit  condition,  or  order  against 
either  the  permittee,  or  licensee,  whether  or  not  such  licensee  is  a  natural  person. 

R2-07  04  LICENSES-SUSPENSION,  REVOCATION  AND  RESTORATION 

04.100  Suspension,  Revocation,  Refusal  to  Renew  a  License:  The  Board  may 
suspend,  revoke  or  refuse  to  renew  a  license  for  any  one  or  any  combination  of 
the  following  reasons  : 

04.101  Incompetency ; 

04.102  Dishonest  practice ; 

04.103  False  or  fraudulent  representation  in  obtaining  a  license  or  permit 
under  the  Act  or  these  Rules ; 

04.104  Failure  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  the  Act  or  of  these 
Rules ;  and 

04.105  Violation  of  any  permit  or  permit  condition. 

04.200  Restoration  of  License :  At  any  time  after  the  suspension  or  revocation 
of  a  license  or  after  refusal  to  renew  a  license  the  Board  may  restore  it  to  the 
licensee  or  renew  it  upon  a  finding  that  the  requirements  for  issuance  of  an 
original  license  have  been  met  by  the  licensee. 

R2-07-05  PERMITS — APPLICATION,  CRITERIA,  ISSUANCE 

05.100  Application  for  Permit :  Application  for  a  weather  modification  permit 
shall  be  made  on  forms  furnished  by  the  Board.  A  properly  executed  application 
shall  be  submitted  to  the  Board  by  every  applicant.  The  application  may  con- 
tain such  information  as  the  Board  deems  necessary,  and  shall  include  the  fol- 
lowing information : 

05.101  Name  and  address  of  the  applicant ; 

05.102  Whether  a  weather  modification  operational  permit  issued  to  the 
applicant  in  any  jurisdiction  has  ever  been  suspended  or  revoked  or  whether 
there  has  been  refusal  to  renew  such  a  permit  by  any  jurisdiction.  If  the 
answer  is  yes,  the  circumstances  must  be  explained  in  detail ; 

05.103  If  the  applicant  is  a  corporation,  whether  it  is  licensed  to  do  business 
in  North  Dakota ; 

05.104  Whether  a  license  has  been  issued  under  Section  2-07-03.3  of  the  Act, 
and  if  so,  the  names,  addresses  and  professional  license  numbers  of  the 
controller (s)  ; 

05.105  Whether  professional  weather  modification  licenses  issued  to  such 
licensee (s)  in  any  jurisdiction  have  ever  been  suspended  or  revoked  or  whether 
there  has  been  refusal  to  renew  such  license (s)  by  any  jurisdiction.  If  the  an- 
swer is  yes,  the  circumstances  must  be  explained  in  detail ; 

05.106  Whether  proof  of  financial  responsibility  has  been  furnished  in  accord- 
ance with  Section  2-07-O4-3  of  the  Act  and  regulation  R2-07M)8  ; 

05.107  If  the  operation  will  be  conducted  under  a  contract,  the  value  of  the 
contract ; 

05.108  If  the  operation  will  not  be  conducted  under  a  contract,  an  estimate 
of  the  costs  of  the  operation  and  information  as  to  how  the  estimate  was  made ; 

05.100  Whether  the  applicant  has  paid  the  application  fee ; 

05.110  Whether  the  applicant  has  North  Dakota  workmen's  compensation 
coverage ; 

05.111  A  copy  of  any  promotional  and  advertising  material  used  in  connec- 
tion with  negotiations  for  the  contract  (if  any)  ; 

05.112  Whether  the  applicant  has  furnished  a  performance  bond,  as  required 
by  subsection  10.204  of  these  rules  ; 

05.113  Whether  the  applicant  has  furnished  a  bid  bond,  as  required  bv  Section 
2-07  09.1  of  the  Act ; 

or,  1 1  i  Whether  the  applicant  has  registered  all  pilots  and  aircraft  to  be  used 
in  the  operation  for  which  the  permit  is  sought  with  the  North  Dakota  Aero- 
nautics Commission. 

05.115  A  complete  and  detailed  operational  plan  for  the  operation  which 
includes : 

( 1  )  The  nature  and  object  of  the  operation  : 

(2)  The  legal  descriptions  of.  and  a  map  showing  the  operations  area, 
and  the  target,  area  ; 


695 


(3)  The  approximate  starting  date  of  the  operation  and  its  anticipated 
duration ; 

(4)  The  kind  of  seeding  agent (s)  intended  for  use  and  the  anticipated 
rate  of  their  use ; 

(5)  A  list  of  equipment  which  will  be  used  and  the  method (s)  of  seeding 
for  which  they  will  be  used  ; 

(6)  An  emergency  shutdown  procedure  which  states  conditions  under 
which  operations  will  be  suspended  because  of  possible  danger  to  the  public 
health,  safety  and  welfare  or  to  the  environment ; 

(7)  The  means  by  which  the  operation  plans  will  be  implemented  and 
carried  out;  such  as  the  location  of  the  main  operational  office  and  any 
other  offices  used  in  connection  with  the  operation,  the  location  of  such 
ground  equipment  as  seeding  generators,  radar  and  evaluation  instrumen- 
tation, the  number  and  kinds  of  aircraft  which  will  be  used  and  the  extent 
to  which  weather  data  will  be  made  available  to  the  licensees  and  other 
personnel  carrying  out  the  project ;  and 

(8)  How  conduct  of  the  operation  will  interact  with  or  affect  other  weath- 
er modification  operations. 

05.116  The  application  shall  show  an  acceptable  plan  for  evaluation  of  the 
operation  by  the  use  of  surface  data  reasonably  available  to  the  applicant. 

05.117  Such  additional  information  as  will  assist  the  Board  in  deciding  whether 
or  not  to  issue  the  permit. 

05.200  Procedure  for  issuance  : 

05.201  Notice :  The  Board  shall  give  notice  of  its  consideration  of  an  applica- 
tion in  accordance  with  Section  2-07-04.1  of  the  Act.  Notice  shall  be  given  once 
a  week  for  two  consecutive  weeks.  The  notice  shall : 

(1)  Describe  the  primary  target  area. 

(2)  Describe  the  operations  area. 

(3)  Specify  the  period  of  operation  including  starting  and  ending  dates. 

(4)  Describe  the  general  method  of  operation. 

(5)  Describe  the  intended  effect  of  the  operation. 

(6)  State  the  name  of  the  proposed  permittee. 

05.202  Hearings :  The  Board  shall  allow  twenty  days  for  public  comment,  in 
accordance  with  Section  2-07-04.1  of  the  Act.  from  the  date  of  the  last  pulbica- 
tion  of  the  notice.  Any  hearing  held  upon  objection  received  by  the  Board  or  any 
hearing  held  upon  the  Board's  own  motion  shall  be  held  upon  at  least  ten  days 
notice  in  the  county  newspaper  in  which  notice  of  consideration  of  the  applica- 
tion was  published.  At  any  such  hearing,  the  Board  shall  make  a  brief  record 
of  testimony  received,  and  shall  consider  all  such  testimony  in  its  decision  on 
the  permit  application. 

05.203  Director's  Recommendation :  At  the  close  of  the  public  comment  period 
provided  for  in  Section  2-07-04.1  of  the  xVct.  the  Director  of  Weather  Modifica- 
tion Board  shall  review  all  applications  for  permits  which  have  been  received 
and  shall  recommend  approval  or  disapproval  of  such  applications  and  the 
reasons  therefor. 

05.204  Final  Action  by  Board  :  The  Board  shall  take  final  action  on  all  applica- 
tions for  permits  for  which  notice  of  consideration  was  published,  pursuant  to 
Section  2-07-04.1  of  the  Act  within  45  days  of  the  close  of  the  public  comment 
period.  Approval  of  applications  considered  shall  be  by  majority  vote.  In  acting 
on  any  such  applications,  the  Board  shall  consider  any  recommendations  made 
by  the  Director  of  the  Board  and  all  testimony  received  at  any  hearing  pursuant 
to  Section  2-07-04.1  of  the  Act.  The  Board  may  issue  a  permit  only  if  it  determines 
that  the  requirements  of  Section  2-07-04(2)  of  the  Act  have  been  met. 

R2-07-06  PERMITS  FORM,  CONDITIONS,  EXPIRATION 

06.100  Permit  form :  Each  permit  shall  set  forth  the  permit  number,  effective 
period  of  the  permit,  name  of  the  permittee,  the  name  of  the  licensee  and  the 
license  number,  the  location  of  the  operation,  and  such  other  information,  terms 
or  conditions  as  the  Board  shall  deem  appropriate. 

06.200  Permit  conditions :  The  Board  may  attach  to  any  permit  such  condi- 
tions as  it  may  deem  appropriate,  including  any  conditions  concerning  method 
and  time  of  operation,  target  and  operation  areas,  safety  precautions  and  record 
keeping.  The  Operations  Manual  for  Hail  Decrease  and  Precipitation  increase 
is  hereby  made  a  condition  of  all  permits  issued  and  all  permits  shall  be 
subject  thereto.  Violation  of  any  permit  or  any  permit  condition  may  result 
in  permit  revocation  or  suspension  or  other  appropriate  enforcement  action  by 
the  Board. 


696 


06.300  Permit  expiration :  AM  permits  shall  expire  in  accordance  with  Section 
2-07-04  of  the  Act  and  shall  not  be  renewable. 

R2-07-07    PERMITS — SUSPENSION,    REVOCATION,    MODIFICATION    AND  RESTORATION 

07.100  Suspension,  Revocation,  Modification :  The  Board  may  suspend,  revoke, 
or  modify  any  permit  or  any  provision  or  condition  of  a  permit  if  it  appears 
to  the  Board  that  the  permittee  no  longer  has  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the 
issuance  of  an  original  permit  or  has  violated  any  provisions  of  the  Act,  the 
terms  or  conditions  of  any  permit,  or  any  of  these  regulations.  Any  provisions 
or  conditions  of  a  permit  may  be  revised  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
Section  2-07-04.2  of  the  Act. 

07.200  Automatic  Suspension  of  Permit :  Any  permit  issued  to  any  person 
under  these  regulations  shall  be  suspended  automatically  if  such  person's  weather 
modifcation  license  expires  or  is  suspended,  revoked  or  not  renewed  by  the 
Board.  Automatic  suspension  shall  result  in  the  case  of  a  permit  issued  to  a 
corporation,  partnership,  or  other  business  association,  if  the  natural  person 
designated  as  being  in  control  of  the  operation  in  such  business  association's 
application  for  a  weather  modification  license  becomes  incapacitated,  leaves  his 
employment,  or  is  in  any  way  unable  to  continue  in  control  of  the  operation.  A 
I>ermit  of  a  business  association  suspended  under  such  circumstances  may  be 
reinstated  by  the  nomination  of  replacement  personnel  in  accordance  with 
Section  03.100  of  these  regulations. 

07.300  Restoration  of  Permit :  At  any  time  after  the  suspension,  revocation 
or  modification  of  a  permit  the  Board  may  restore  it  to  the  permittee,  or  delete 
any  modification  thereof,  upon  a  finding  that  the  requirements  for  issuance  of 
an  original  permit  have  been  met  by  the  permittee,  or  that  the  conditoins  requir- 
ing modification  no  longer  exist. 

R2-0  7-08  PROOF  OF  FINANCIAL  RESPONSIBILITY 

Proof  of  financial  responsibility  is  made  by  showing  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
Board  that  the  permittee  has  the  ability  to  respond  in  damages  to  liability  which 
might  reasonably  result  from  the  operation  for  which  the  permit  is  sought. 
Such  proof  of  financial  responsibility  may  be  shown  by  : 

08.100  Presentation  to  the  Board  of,  or  proof  of  purchase  of.  a  prepaid  non- 
cancellable  insurance  policy  or  a  corporate  surety  bond  issued  by  a  company 
against  whom  service  of  legal  process  may  be  made  in  North  Dakota  against 
such  liabilities  in  an  amount  five  times  the  value  of  an  operation  conducted 
under  contract  or  in  an  amount  five  times  the  estimated  costs  of  an  operation 
not  conducted  under  contract ;  or 

08.200  Depositing  with  the  Board  cash  or  negotiable  securities  in  an  amount 
five  times  the  value  of  an  operation  conducted  under  contract  or  in  an  amount 
five  times  the  estimated  costs  of  an  operation  not  conducted  under  contract. 

08.300  Any  other  manner  approved  by  the  Board. 

R2-07-09  RECORD  KEEPING  AND  REPORTS 

09.100  Records : 

09.101  Daily  Log :  Each  permittee  shall  fill  in  and  retain  a  daily  log  of  weather 
modification  activities  for  each  unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus  used 
during  an  operation.  Such  log  shall  include  a  record  of  the  following  information 
for  each  day  of  weather  modification  operations. 

( 1 )  Date  of  the  weather  modification  activity  ; 

(2)  Each  aircraft  flight  track  and  location  of  each  radar  unit  during  each 
modification  mission.  Maps  may  be  used  ; 

(3)  Local  time  when  modification  activity  began  and  ended.  For  inter- 
mittent operations,  the  beginning  and  ending  time  of  the  total  sequence  are 
acceptable ; 

(4)  Duration  of  operation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modificaiton  apparatus, 
in  hours  and  minutes  ; 

(5)  Description  of  type  of  modification  agent(s)  used; 

(6)  Rate  of  dispersal  of  agent  during  the  period  of  actual  operation  of 
weather  modification  apparatus,  by  hour  cr  other  appropirate  time  period; 

(7)  Total  amount  of  modification  agent  used.  If  more  than  one  agent  was 
UMd,  rejK)rt  total  for  each  type  separately  ; 

(8)  Local  time  when  any  radar  monitoring  operations  were  turned  on  and 
turned  off ; 


697 


(9)  Type  of  clouds  modified;  that  is,  whether  they  were  stratiform,  iso- 
lated cuniuliform.  organized  cumuliform  or  other  types  of  clouds ; 

(10)  Remarks  indicating  such  operational  problem  as  equipment  failure, 
weather  conditions  not  conducive  to  successful  performance  of  the  operation, 
personnel  problems  and  the  like. 

09.102  Monthly  Totals  :  Monthly  Totals  shall  be  kept  on  the  basis  of  the  daily 
logs,  listing  the  total : 

(1)  Days  during  month  in  which  operation  conducted  ; 

(2)  Time  of  operation  ; 

(3)  Amount  of  each  kind  of  agent  used  ; 

(4)  Average  rate  of  dispersal  of  each  kind  of  agent  used ; 

(5)  Days  of  each  type  of  cloud  treated  ;  and 

(6)  Duration  of  operation  of  each  unit  of  weather  modification  apparatus, 
in  hours  and  minutes. 

09.103  Weather  Records 

Each  permittee  shall  obtain  and  retain  copies  of  all  daily  precipitation  total 
records  available  from  the  National  Weather  Service  stations  for  the  target 
area. 

09.104  Addresses  of  Participants 

Each  permittee  must  keep  a  roster  of  the  names  and  North  Dakota  addresses  of 
all  employees  participating  in  the  state  on  an  operation  for  which  a  permit  has 
been  issued. 

09.105  Inspection 

Duly  authorized  agents  of  the  Board  shall  have  the  authority  to  enter  and  in- 
spect, any  equipment  and  to  inspect  any  records  required  by  this  regulation  and 
to  make  copies  thereof. 

09.106  Exempted  Weather  Modification  Activities 

All  persons  conducting  weather  modification  activities  exempted  by  the  Board 
under  the  provisions  of  Section  2-07-03.1  of  the  Act  shall  record  and  maintain 
all  of  the  records  required  of  any  permittee  by  this  regulation. 

09.200  Reports : 

09.201  Monthly  :  Within  ten  days  after  the  conclusion  of  each  calendar  month, 
■  each  permittee  shall  submit  a  written  report  to  the  Board  which  shall  include : 

(1 )  A  copy  of  the  summary  record  prepared  under  09.102  ; 

(2)  A  copy  of  the  roster  of  the  names  and  North  Dakota  addresses  of  all 
employees  participating  in  state  operations  which  were  prepared  under 
09.104 ; 

(3)  A  copy,  of  the  federal  interim  activity  report  form  filed  for  that  month 
with  the  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  in  accordance 
with  the  rules  adopted  under  the  authority  of  Public  Law  92-205 ;  and 

(4)  A  narrative  account  of  the  manner  in  which  operations  during  the 
month  did  not  conform  to  the  operational  plan  filed  in  accordance  with 
00.101(15). 

09.202  Final :  Within  thirty  days  after  final  completion  of  any  operation,  each 
permittee  shall  file  with  the  Board  a  final  report  on  the  operation  which  shall 
include : 

(1)  Copies  of  the  logs  prepared  in  accordance  with  09.101,  copies  of  the 
weather  records  obtained  in  accordance  with  09.103  and,  copies  of  the  totals 
for  the  entire  operational  period  from  the  monthly  summary  records  pre- 
pared under  09.102 ; 

(2)  A  copy  of  the  federal  final  activity  report  form  filed  with  the  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration  in  accordance  with  the  rules 
adopted  under  the  authority  of  Public  Law  92-205  ;  and 

(3)  A  narrative  account  of  the  manner  in  which  the  operation  did  not 
confirm  to  the  operational  plan  filed  in  accordance  with  05.101(15). 

09.203  Evaluation  :  Within  sixty  days  after  completion  of  any  operation  for 
which  a  permit  was  issued,  each  permittee  shall  file  with  the  Board  a  narrative 
evaluation  of  the  operation.  The  data  for  this  report  shall  be  assembled  and 
evaluated  in  accordance  with  the  evaluation  plan  prepared  in  compliance  with 
05.101(16). 

09.204  Exempted  Weather  Modification  Activities  :  The  Board  may,  in  its 
discretion,  require  persons  operating  weather  modification  activities  exempted 
under  R2-07-02  but  who  have  been  required  to  keep  records  pursuant  to  this 
regulation,  to  file  all  or  any  part  of  such  records  with  the  Board. 


698 


R2-07-10  BIDDING  AND  AWARD  OF  CONTRACTS 

10.100  Bid  Procedure : 

10.101  Advertisement  and  Reauest  for  Bid:  (1^  In  all  cases  where  the  Board 
shall  undertake  to  contract  for  services,  supplies,  or  materials,  the  estimated 
cost  of  which  shall  exceed  $10,000  for  any  one  contract,  the  Board  shall  advertise 
for  bids  for  such  services,  supplies,  or  materials.  Such  advertisement  shall  he 
placed  for  three  consecutive  weeks  in  the  official  newspaper  of  the  county  in 
which  the  Board's  offices  are  located  and  in  at  least  one  official  newspaper  in 
general  circulation  in  the  state.  In  the  case  of  contracts  for  weather  modifica- 
tion operations,  such  advertisement  shall  also  be  placed  in  some  trade  publica- 
tion of  general  circulation  among  those  groups  most  likely  to  bid  on  the  contract. 
The  advertisement  shall  state : 

(a)  That  any  prospective  bidders  may  secure  such  contract  specifications 
and  requirements  as  may  be  available  by  applying  in  writing  to  the  offices 
of  the  Board. 

(b)  The  place  where  and  the  day  and  hour  when  the  bids  will  be  opened ; 

(c)  That  the  right  of  the  Board  to  reject  any  and  all  bids  is  reserved ; 

(d)  Each  bid  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  bidder's  bond  in  a  sum  equal  to 
five  percent  of  the  full  amount  of  the  bid,  executed  by  the  bidder  as  principal 
and  by  a  surety  company  authorized  to  do  business  within  this  state,  con- 
ditioned that  if  the  bid  be  accepted  and  the  contract  awarded  to  him,  he, 
within  ten  days  notice  of  award,  will  execute  and  effect  a  contract  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  terms  of  his  bid  and  a  contractor's  bond  in  the  manner 
specified  by  subsection  10.204. 

(e)  No  bid  will  be  read  or  considered  which  does  not  fully  comply  with 
the  above  provisions  concerning  bonding  and  no  contract  will  be  awarded 
to  any  person  who  has  not  complied  with  any  applicable  licensing  require- 
ments of  the  Board. 

(2)  In  the  case  of  contracts  for  weather  modification  operations,  the  Board 
may,  in  addition  to  the  requirements  of  subsection  10.101(1),  prepare  a  request 
for  bid  in  which  it  shall  describe  the  minimum  requirements  for  aircraft,  radar, 
communications  and  other  equipment,  operational  and  such  other  requirements  as 
it  may  deem  necessary.  Such  request  for  bid  shall  include  those  items  of  informa- 
tion specified  in  subdivisions  (b)  through  (e)  of  subsection  10.101(1).  The  re- 
quest may  be  sent  by  the  Board  to  those  persons  having  a  recognized  interest  in 
operations  contracts. 

10.102  Opening  of  Bids:  At  the  time  and  place  designated  in  the  request  for 
bids,  the  Board  shall  conduct  a  public  hearing  at  which  it  shall  open  all  bids 
received.  After  opening  each  bid,  the  Board  shall  determine  whether  such  bid 
meets  the  minimum  requirements  set  forth  in  the  Act,  these  regulations,  and 
the  request  for  bid,  and  then  read  aloud  each  bid  meeting  such  minimum  re- 
quirements. Bids  which  do  not  meet  such  minimum  requirements  shall  not  be  read 
or  considered. 

10.200  Award  of  contracts  : 

10.201  Deviation  from  technical  requirements  :  Any  or  all  bids  may  be  rejected 
by  the  Board  on  the  basis  of  technical  inadequacy  or  other  failure  to  comply  with 
the  specifications  included  in  the  request  for  bids.  Bids  which  are  technically 
adequate  but  which  show  price  quotations  beyond  the  budget  restrictions  may  be 
negotiated  with  the  Director  for  reduction  in  equipment  and/or  services  either 
required  by,  or  bid  over  and  above  the  requirements  of,  the  request  for  bid.  All 
such  negotiations  shall  be  conducted  at  the  discretion  of  the  Board. 

10.202  Point  scoring  system  to  be  used  :  Bidders  for  weather  modification  op- 
eration contracts  shall  be  evaluated  on  the  basis  of  the  amount  of  the  bid  sub- 
mitted and  a  system  of  points  allotted  to  each  bidder  for  evaluation  criteria  estab- 
lished by  the  Board.  Sole  authority  for  establishment  of  point  values  and  scoring 
shall  rest  with  the  Director.  Point  scores  assigned  shall  be  final  and  non-nego- 
tiable. Previous  experience  and  performance  shall  be  a  criteria  to  be  considered 
in  scoring  each  bidder.  The  bidder  scoring  the  lowest  cost  per  point  shall  be 
awarded  the  contracts  in  accordance  with  subsection  10.203. 

10.203  Low  bid-preference  for  North  Dakota  bidders:  In  awarding  any  con- 
tract, tlx-  Board  shall  award  it  to  the  lowest  and  best  bidder,  and  shall,  if  all 
other  factors  are  equal,  give  that  preference  for  North  Dakota  bidders  estab- 
lisbed  by  Section  44-0S-01  of  the  North  Dakota  Century  Code. 

10.204  Contractor's  bond  :  Before  the  Board  shall  award  any  contract,  it  shall 
require  the  Contractor  to  furnish  a  surety  bond  for  the  faithful  performance  of  the 


699 


contract  in  the  amount  of  twenty-five  percent  of  the  contract  price,  conditioned 
that  the  contractor  and  his  agents  will,  in  all  respects,  faithfully  perform  all 
weather  modification  contracts  undertaken  with  the  Board  and  will  comply 
with  all  provisions  of  the  Act,  these  regulations,  and  the  contract  entered  into 
by  the  Board  and  the  contractor. 

Rules  of  Practice  and  Procedure  Before  the  North  Dakota  Weather 

Modification  Board 

r2s-3  2-01  general  provisions 

01.100  Scope :  The  provisions  of  these  regulations  shall  apply  to  all  hearings 
held  by  the  Board  for  the  purposes  of  adjudicating  the  rights  of  parties  under 
Chapter  2-07  of  the  North  Dakota  Century  Code.  These  regulations  shall  provide 
procedures  in  addition  to  or  in  explanation  of  those  procedures  provided  by  such 
chapter  and  Chapter  28-32. 

01.200  Liberal  Construction  :  These  regulations  shall  be  liberally  construed  in 
order  to  secure  just,  speedy,  and  inexpensive  determination  of  the  issues 
presented. 

01.300  Suspension  of  Rules :  The  Board  or  any  hearing  officer  shall  have  the 
right,  upon  either  its  own  motion  or  the  motion  of  any  party,  to  suspend  the 
operation  and  effect  of  these  regulations  or  any  portion  thereof,  whenever  the 
public  interest  or  the  interests  of  any  party  to  a  proceeding  shall  not  be  sub- 
stantially prejudiced  by  such  suspension. 

01.400  Definitions:  As  used  in  these  regulations,  the  following  words  shall 
have  the  meaning  given  to  them  below,  unless  otherwise  made  inappropriate  by 
context. 

01.401  "Board"  shall  mean  the  North  Dakota  Weather  Modification  Board. 

01.402  "Hearing  Officer"  or  "Officer"  shall  mean  the  person  appointed  by  the 
Board  to  call  and  conduct  a  hearing. 

01.403  "License"  means  a  professional  weather  modification  license  issued 
under  the  provisions  of  Chapter  2-07. 

01.404  "Order"  shall  mean  any  written  command  or  direction  made  by  the 
Board  as  provided  by  law. 

01.405  "Person"  shall  mean  any  real  person,  county,  municipality  or  other 
political  subdivision,  department,  agency  or  commission,  any  public  or  private 
corporation,  any  partnership,  asociation  or  other  organization,  any  receiver, 
trustee,  assignee,  or  other  legal  entity,  other  than  a  court  of  lawT,  or  other  legal 
representative  of  the  foregoing  but  does  not  include  the  Board. 

01.406  "Permit"  means  a  weather  modification  permit  issued  under  the  provi- 
sions of  Chapter  2-07. 

01.500  Case  Numbers  and  Title :  Each  matter  coming  formally  before  the 
Board  for  hearing  will  be  known  as  a  case  and  shall  be  given  a  docket  number  and 
title,  descriptive  of  the  subject  matter.  Such  number  and  title  shall  be  used  on  all 
papers  in  the  case,  and  as  far  as  possible,  any  communication  to  the  Board  in  any 
particular  case  shall  bear  the  number  of  said  case. 

01.600  Personal  Appearances :  Participants  may  appear  in  any  proceeding  in 
person  or  by  an  attorney  or  other  representative  qualified  under  Section  01.703. 
An  individual  may  appear  in  his  own  behalf,  a  member  of  a  partnership  may 
represent  the  partnership,  a  bona  fide  officer  or  duly  authorized  employee  of  a 
corporation,  association  or  group,  and  an  officer  or  employee  of  a  state  agency,  of 
a  department  or  political  subdivision  of  the  state  or  other  governmental  authority, 
may  represent  the  state  agency  or  the  department  or  the  political  subdivision  of 
the  state  or  other  governmental  authority  in  any  proceeding. 

01.700  Practice  Before  the  Board  : 

01.701  Person  in  own  interest :  Any  person  may  appear  before  the  Board  in  his 
own  right  if  he  has  a  bona  fide  interest  in  the  subject  matter  of  the  proceeding. 

01.702  Attorneys :  Attorneys  at  law  who  are  admitted  to  practice  before  the 
courts  of  the  state  of  North  Dakota  may  represent  any  party  to  a  proceeding. 
Any  member  of  the  bar  of  another  state  may  be  permitted  by  the  Board  to  appear 
in  and  conduct  a  case  or  proceeding  while  retaining  his  residence  in  another  state. 

01.703  Other  Persons :  Any  other  person  who  shall  file  proof  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  Board  that  he  is  possessed  of  necessary  legal  or  technical  qualifications  to 
enable  him  to  render  valuable  service  may  be  permitted  to  practice  before  the 
Board. 


700 


01.704  Rules  of  Conduct :  All  persons  appearing  before  the  Board  must  conform 
to  the  standards  of  ethical  conduct  required  of  practitioners  before  the  courts  of 
the  state  of  North  Dakota. 

01.800  Parties : 

01.801  Parties :  Any  person  whose  legal  rights,  duties,  or  privileges  may  be  de- 
termined in  the  case  for  which  the  hearing  may  be  held  shall  be  a  party.  When 
a  hearing  is  held  pursuant  to  a  request  for  a  hearing,  the  person  making  the 
request  shall  be  a  party.  The  Board  shall  be  a  party  in  any  action  to  enforce  any 
regulation,  statute,  permit,  condition,  or  order  of  the  Board.  Any  person  who 
has  properly  intervened  in  a  case  shall  be  a  party. 

01.802  Petitioner :  Any  person  seeking  reconsideration,  as  provided  by  law,  of 
any  administrative  action  taken  pursuant  to  law  and  these  regulations,  shall  be 
styled  the  petitioner. 

01.803  Respondent :  Any  person  against  whom  any  complaint  is  filed  or  order 
issued  under  these  regulations  shall  be  styled  the  respondent. 

01.804  Intervenor  :  Persons  petitioning  to  intervene  when  admitted  as  a  partici- 
pant to  a  proceeding  shall  be  styled  intervenors.  Admission  as  an  intervenor  shall 
not  be  construed  as  recognition  by  the  Board  that  such  intervenor  might  be 
aggrieved  by  any  order  of  the  Board  in  such  proceeding. 

01.805  Complainant :  Persons  who  complain  of  any  act  or  omission  in  violation 
of  any  statute,  regulation  or  permit  of  the  Board  shall  be  styled  complainants. 

01.900  Investigation  Upon  the  Board's  Own  Motion :  The  Board  may  at  any 
time,  upon  its  own  motion,  or  upon  the  complaint  of  any  person,  institute  investi- 
gations and  order  hearings  in  any  thing  done  by  any  person  which  the  Board  may 
believe  is  in  violation  of  the  law  or  any  order,  regulation  or  permit  of  the  Board. 
The  Board  may  secure  and  present  such  evidence  as  it  may  consider  necessary 
or  desirable  in  any  proceeding  in  addition  to  the  evidence  presented  by  any 
other  party- 

01.1000  Computation  of  Time  : 

01.1001  In  determining  the  day  upon  which  an  answer  must  be  served  pursuant 
to  Section  28-32-05,  the  day  of  the  hearing  and  the  last  day  upon  which  an  answer 
may  properly  be  received  shall  not  be  included  in  computing  the  required  three- 
day  time  period.  If  the  day  upon  which  the  answer  is  due  falls  on  a  Saturday, 
Sunday,  or  legal  holiday,  the  answer  shall  be  due  on  the  preceding  business  day. 

01.1002  In  computing  any  period  of  time  prescribed  or  allowed  by  these  rules, 
other  than  that  time  period  set  out  in  subsection  01.1001,  the  day  of  the  act, 
event,  or  default  after  which  the  designated  period  of  time  begins  to  run  is  not 
to  be  included.  The  last  day  of  the  period  so  computed  is  to  be  included,  unless 
it  is  a  Sunday  or  legal  holiday,  in  which  event  the  period  runs  until  the  end  of 
the  next  day  which  is  neither  a  Sunday  nor  a  holiday.  When  the  period  of  time 
prescribed  or  allowed  is  less  than  seven  days,  intermediate  Sundays  and  holidays 
shall  be  excluded  in  the  computation. 

01.1100  Service:  For  the  purposes  of  these  Rules,  service  or  filing  shall  be 
deemed  to  have  occurred  upon  actual  receipt  of  the  document  served  or  filed. 

01.1200  Record  :  Unless  any  party  demands  otherwise  at  least  ten  days  prior  to 
the  date  of  hearing,  a  written  summary  record  or  tape  recording  of  the  proceeding 
will  be  made  and  filed.  If  demanded,  the  Board  shall  cause  a  verbatim  transcript 
to  any  proceedings  to  be  made  at  the  expense  of  the  demanding  parties.  The  time 
period  required  herein  shall  be  computed,  as  nearly  as  practicable,  by  that 
method  specified  in  Section  01.1001. 

R2 8-3 2-0 2  PLEADINGS 

02.100  Informal  Complaint :  Informal  complaints  may  be  made  orally  or  in 
writing  addressed  to  the  Board.  Letters  of  complaint  to  the  Board  will  be  con- 
sidered as  informal  complaints.  Matters  thus  presented  will  be  handled  by  corre- 
spondence or  by  other  informal  communications,  or  by  conference  with  the  party 
or  parties  complained  of,  or  by  formal  investigation  instituted  by  the  Board  upon 
its  own  motion,  or  in  such  other  manner  as  the  Board  shall  deem  to  be  appropriate 
and  warranted  by  the  facts  and  the  nature  of  the  complaint  in  an  endeavor  to 
bring  about  satisfaction  of  the  complaint  without  formal  hearing. 

02.200  Formal  Complaints : 

02.201  Complaints  shall  be  made  by  the  Board  on  its  own  motion  by  complaint 
in  writing,  setting  forth  any  act  or  tiling  done  or  omitted  to  be  done  in  violation 
or  claimed  to  be  violation  of  any  provision  of  law  or  of  any  order,  rule,  regula- 
tion, or  permit  of  the  Board. 


701 


02.202  Each  formal  complaint  shall  show  the  venue,  "Before  the  North  Dakota 
Board  of  Weather  Modification"  and  shall  contain  a  heading,  "In  the  Matter  of", 
showing  the  name  and  address  of  the  respondent.  The  complaint  shall  be  so  drawn 
as  to  fully  and  completely  advise  the  respondent  or  the  Board  of  the  facts  con- 
stituting the  ground  of  the  complaint ;  the  provisions  of  the  statutes,  regulations, 
orders,  or  permit  relied  upon ;  the  injury  complained  of ;  and  shall  contain  a 
clear,  concise  statement  of  the  relief  sought. 

02.203  The  Board  shall  serve  a  true  copy  of  the  complaint  and  notice  for  hear- 
ing upon  the  respondent  personally,  or  by  registered  or  certified  mail,  as  the 
Board  may  direct,  in  such  time  as  provided  by  law  before  the  time  specified  for 
hearing  thereof  unless  the  service  of  such  complaint  or  notice  of  hearing  is 
waived,  in  writing,  by  the  respondent,  or  unless  the  parties  agree  upon  a  definite 
time  and  place  for  hearing  thereof  with  the  consent  of  the  Board  ;  provided,  how- 
ever, that  in  case  of  an  emergency,  the  Board  shall  notice  a  proceeding  for 
hearing  upon  its  merits  as  provided  by  law. 

02.300  Order  to  Show  Cause : 

02.301  The  Board  may,  by  order,  compel  any  person  who  it  believes  is  violating 
any  law,  regulation,  or  order  of  the  Board  subject  to  enforcement  by  these  regula- 
tions, or  any  person  who  has  been  granted  a  permit,  to  show  cause  why  such  law, 
regulation  or  order  should  not  be  enforced  against  such  person  or  why  such  permit 
should  not  be  suspended,  revoked  or  modified,  either  in  whole  or  in  part. 

02.302  An  order  to  show  cause  shall  specifically  advise  the  respondent  of  the 
facts  of  the  violation  and  law  applicable  thereto  and  of  the  time  and  place  of  the 
hearing  to  be  conducted  on  the  order. 

02.303  If  the  Board  finds  that  the  respondent  is  committing  or  is  about  to  com- 
mit an  alleged  violation,  it  may  order  the  respondent  to  cease  and  desist  from 
the  acts  constituting  the  violation.  The  Board  may  also,  or  in  lieu  thereof,  enter 
any  other  just  and  reasonable  order. 

02.400  Petition  for  Hearing :  Any  petitioner  requesting  the  Board  to  review  by 
hearing,  as  provided  by  law,  any  Board  action,  rule,  or  regulation,  shall  file  with 
the  Board  a  petition,  which  may  be  in  letter  form,  advising  the  Board  of  the  facts 
constituting  the  grounds  for  the  petition,  the  injury  complained  of  and  a  clear 
and  concise  statement  of  the  relief  sought. 

02.500  Answers: 

02.501  Each  answer  filed  with  the  Board  shall  be  designated  as  an  "answer" 
shall  contain  the  correct  title  of  the  proceeding,  and  a  specific  denial  of  such  ma- 
terial allegations  of  the  complaint  as  are  controverted  by  the  respondent  and  also 
a  statement  of  any  new  matter  which  may  constitute  a  defense.  If  the  answering 
party  has  no  information  or  belief  upon  the  subject  sufficient  to  enable  him  to  an- 
swer an  allegation  of  the  complaint,  he  may  so  state  in  his  answer  and  place  his 
denial  upon  that  ground.  The  filing  of  an  answer  will  not  be  deemed  an  admission 
of  the  sufficiency  of  the  complaint. 

02.502  An  answer  must  be  signed  and  verified  by  the  respondent  filing  the  same. 

02.503  Two  true  and  correct  copies  of  the  answer  shall  be  served  upon  the  Board 
personally  or  by  registered  mail,  at  least  three  days  before  the  time  specified  in 
the  complaint  for  hearing. 

02.600  Response  to  Petition  for  Hearing  : 

02.601  Upon  receiving  a  petition  for  hearing  upon  any  matter,  as  provided  by 
law,  the  Board  shall,  within  thirty  (30)  days  of  such  receipt,  serve  upon  the 
petitioner,  a  response  to  the  petition.  Such  response  may  be  in  letter  form  and 
shall  state  the  decision  of  the  Board  whether  or  not  to  hold  the  requested  hearing. 
If  a  hearing  is  granted,  the  response  shall  state  the  date  upon  which  the  petition- 
ing party  may  appear  to  be  heard,  and  such  other  conditions  of  the  hearing  as  the 
Board  may  determine.  If  the  requested  hearing  is  denied,  the  reasons  for  such 
denial  shall  be  clearly  stated.  This  subsection  shall  not  apply  to  hearings  on 
emergency  orders. 

02.602  Upon  receiving  a  petition  for  hearing  pursuant  to  an  emergency  order, 
as  provided  by  law,  the  Board  shall  set  a  date  for  hearing  to  be  held  within  ten 
(10)  days  of  receipt  of  such  petition  and  shall  notify  the  petitioner  of  such  date 
and  of  such  other  conditions  of  the  hearing  as  the  Board  shall  determine. 

02.700  Intervention :  In  any  formal  proceeding,  any  person  having  a  substan- 
tial interest  in  the  subject  matter  of  such  proceeding  may  petition  for  leave  to 
intervene  in  such  proceeding  and  may  become  a  party  thereto  upon  compliance 
with  the  provisions  of  this  rule.  In  general,  such  petitions  will  not  be  granted 
unless  it  shall  be  found  that  such  person  has  a  statutory  right  to  be  made  a  party 
to  such  proceedings  or  that  such  person  has  a  property,  financial,  or  other  legally- 


34-857  O  -  79  -  47 


702 


recognizable  interest  which  may  not  be  adequately  represented  by  existing  parties, 
and  such  intervention  would  not  unduly  broaden  the  issues  or  delay  the  pro- 
ceeding. 

02.701  A  petition  for  leave  to  intervene  shall  be  in  writing,  unless  made  at  the 
commencement  of  a  hearing,  and  must  set  forth  the  grounds  of  the  proposed  inter- 
vention, the  position  and  interest  of  the  petitioner  in  the  proceeding,  and  whether 
the  petitioner's  position  is  in  support  of  or  in  opposition  to  the  relief  sought. 

02.702  A  written  petition  for  leave  to  intervene  in  any  proceeding  may  be  filed 
prior  to  or  at  the  commencement  of  the  hearing,  but  not  after  commencement, 
except  for  good  cause  shown. 

02.703.  The  petitioner  shall  furnish  a  copy  of  any  written  petition  to  each  party 
to  the  proceeding,  including  the  Board. 

02.704  Admission  as  an  inter venor  shall  not  be  construed  as  recognition  by  the 
Board  that  such  intervenor  might  be  aggrieved  by  any  act  of  the  Board  in  such 
proceeding. 

02.800  Amendments  :  The  Board,  prior  to  any  hearing,  or  the  hearing  officer  dur- 
ing any  hearing,  may,  after  notice  to  the  other  parties  to  a  proceeding,  allow  any 
pleading  to  be  amended  or  corrected  or  any  omission  therein  to  be  supplied, 
provided  that  if  any  such  amendment,  when  allowed,  so  alters  or  broadens  the 
issues  that  it  appears  proper,  the  Board  may  permit  any  party  affected  thereby  a 
reasonable  time  to  prepare  to  meet  the  changed  issues. 

02.900  Withdrawal  of  Pleading :  A  party  desiring  to  withdraw  a  pleading  file 
with  the  Board  may  file  a  notice  of  withdrawal  thereof  with  the  Board.  Such 
notice  shall  set  forth  the  reason  for  the  withdrawal.  A  copy  of  such  withdrawal 
notice  must  be  served  upon  all  other  parties  to  the  proceeding  and  a  certificate 
of  service  to  that  effect  filed  with  the  notice  of  withdrawal.  Withdrawal  of  any 
pleading  in  any  proceeding  in  which  a  hearing  has  been  held  or  convened  shall 
not  be  allowed  without  express  permission  of  the  Board. 

02.1000  Motions :  After  a  complaint  or  petition  has  been  served,  a  request  may 
be  made  by  motion  for  any  procedural  or  interlocutory  ruling  or  relief  proper  and 
desired.  All  motions  not  made  in  the  course  of  a  hearing  shall  be  in  writing  and 
shall  be  served  on  the  other  parties  to  the  hearing  by  the  moving  party. 

02.1001  The  Board,  prior  or  subsequent  to  any  hearing,  or  the  hearing  officer 
during  any  hearing,  may  set  any  motion  for  oral  argument. 

02.1002  The  hearing  officer  designated  to  preside  at  a  hearing  is  authorized  to 
rule  upon  any  motion  not  formally  acted  upon  by  the  Board  prior  to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  hearing,  wherein  the  immediate  ruling  is  essential  in  order  to  proceed 
with  the  hearing  and  upon  any  motion  filed  and  made  after  the  commencement 
thereof  and  prior  to  the  decision  in  the  proceedings ;  provided,  however,  that  no 
motion  made  before  or  during  a  hearing,  a  ruling  upon  which  would  involve  or 
constitute  a  final  determination  of  the  proceeding,  shall  be  ruled  upon  by  an 
examiner. 

02.1003  Motions  not  ruled  upon  by  the  examiner  shall  be  ruled  upon  by  the 
Hoard. 

02.1004  Appeals  from  rulings  of  the  examiner  on  any  motion  may  be  takei.  as 
provided  in  04.600. 

R28-3  2-03  PRE-HEARING  MATTERS 

03.100  Informal  Disposition :  Informal  disposition  may  be  made  of  any  case,  or 
any  issue  therein,  by  stipulation,  or  consent  order  at  any  point  therein,  subject  to 
the  approval  of  such  informal  disposition,  or  any  terms  thereof,  by  the  Board. 

03.200  Prehearing  Conference  :  A  prehearing  conference  may  be  held  at  any  time 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Board  or  hearing  officer  prior  to  any  hearing.  The  prehear- 
ing conference  shall  be  an  informal  proceeding  conducted  fairly  and  expeditiously 
by  the  hearing  officer,  for  purposes  of  identifying  and  simplifying  the  issues 
to  be  determined,  identifying  and  limiting  the  number  of  witnesses,  and  reaching 
an  agreement  on  any  or  all  issues  of  law  or  fact  without  the  necessity  for  further 
hearing  thereon.  In  addition  to  any  offer  of  settlement,  the  following  are  appro- 
priate for  consideration  at  a  prehearing  conference  : 
(1)  The  simplification  of  issues  ; 

(2  )  The  necessity  or  desirability  of  amendment  to  the  pleadings  ; 

(3)  The  exchange  and  acceptance  of  service  of  exhibits  proposed  to  be 
offered  in  evidence; 

(4)  The  obtaining  of  admission  as  to.  or  stipulations  of,  facts  not  remaining 
in  dispute,  or  the  authenticity  of  documents  which  may  properly  shorten  the 
hearing ; 


703 


(5)  The  limitation  of  the  number  of  witnesses  ;  and 

(6)  Such  other  matters  as  may  properly  be  dealt  with  to  aid  in  expediting 
the  orderly  conduct  of  the  proceeding. 

03.300  Conference  Results  Stipulated :  Upon  conclusion  of  prehearing  confer- 
ence, the  parties  shall  immediately  reduce  the  results  thereof  to  the  form  of  a 
written  stipulation  which  recites  the  matters  agreed  upon,  which  stipulation 
shall  be  filed  with  the  Board.  Any  such  stipulation  may  be  received  in  evidence 
at  a  hearing  and,  when  so  received,  shall  be  binding  on  the  parties  with  respect 
to  the  matters  therein  stipulated. 

03.400  Consolidation :  The  Board,  upon  its  own  motion,  or  upon  motion  by  any 
party,  may  order  two  or  more  proceedings  involving  a  similar  question  of  law  or 
facts  to  be  consolidated  for  hearing  where  rights  of  the  parties  or  the  public 
interest  will  not  be  prejudiced  by  such  procedure. 

R2 8-3 2-04  HEARINGS 

04.100  Hearing  Officers: 

04.101  Appointment :  All  hearing  officers  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Board.  The 
Board  shall  appoint  a  hearing  officer  within  five  (5)  days  of  service  of  a  com- 
plaint or  petition.  Notification  of  the  appointment  shall  be  made  to  all  parties  in 
such  manner  as  the  Board  may  determine. 

04.102  Qualification : 

(1)  All  appointments  hereunder  shall  be  consistent  with  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  objectivity  and  impartiality  in  making  decisions. 

(2)  The  hearing  officer  may  be  an  employee  or  a  member  of  the  Board. 
The  Board  may  appoint  as  hearing  officer  a  person  who  is  not  an  employee 
or  member  of  the  Board.  In  such  event,  the  hearing  officer  shall  be  an  attorney 
at  law  licensed  to  practice  in  the  State  of  North  Dakota,  unless  some  other 
person  is  agreed  upon  by  all  parties ;  provided  that  such  hearing  officer  shall 
be  considered  an  employee  of  the  Board  for  the  sole  purpose  of  compensation, 
if  any.  and  authorization  to  conduct  the  hearing  and  recommend  findings 
of  fact  and  a  decision  to  the  Board.  In  all  other  respects,  he  shall  be  inde- 
pendent of  the  Board. 

(3)  In  all  cases,  the  Board  retains  discretion  to  conduct  the  hearing  itself, 
in  which  case  an  employee  of  the  Board  shall  be  the  hearing  officer. 

04.103  Authority :  The  appointment  of  the  hearing  officer  shall,  to  the  extent 
permitted  by  law,  authorize  and  direct  the  hearing  officer  to  conduct  the  hearing 
and  recommend  a  decision  to  the  Board.  When  evidence  is  to  be  taken  in  a  pro- 
ceeding, one  or  more  of  examiners,  when  duly  designated  for  that  purpose,  shall 
preside  at  the  hearing.  An  officer  duly  designated  by  the  Board  to  preside  at  a 
hearing  shall  have  the  authority  to  take  any  of  the  following  actions  in  the  name 
of  the  Board. 

(1)  To  regulate  the  course  of  hearing ; 

(2)  To  administer  oath  ; 

(3)  To  issue  subpoenas  ; 

(4)  To  take  depositions  or  cause  same  to  be  taken ; 

(5)  To  rule  upon  offers  of  proof  and  to  receive  eivdence ; 

(6)  To  hold  appropriate  conferences  before  or  during  hearings  ; 

(7)  To  dispose  of  procedural  matters  but  not  to  dispose  of  motions  made 
during  hearings  to  dismiss  proceedings  or  other  motion  which  involves  a  final 
determination  of  proceedings ; 

(8)  To  exclude  evidence  which  is  cumulative  or  repetitious  ; 

(9)  To  authorize  any  party  to  furnish  and  serve  designated  late-filed  ex- 
hibits within  a  specified  time  after  the  close  of  the  hearing; 

(10)  To  order  discovery ; 

(11)  Within  their  discretion,  or  upon  direction  of  the  Board,  to  certify 
any  question  to  the  Board  for  its  consideration  and  disposition  ;  and 

(12)  To  take  any  other  action  necessary  or  appropriate  to  discharge  the 
duties  vested  in  them,  consistent  with  statutory  or  other  authorities  under 
which  the  Board  functions  and  with  the  rules,  regulations  and  policies  of 
the  Board. 

04.104  Limitations :  Hearing  officers  shall  perform  no  duties  inconsistent  with 
their  responsibilities  as  such.  No  officer  shall  in  any  proceeding  for  an  adjudica- 
tion required  by  statute  to  be  determined  on  the  record  after  opportunity  for 
hearing,  consult  any  person  or  party  on  any  fact  in  issue  unless  upon  notice  and 
opportunity  for  all  parties  to  participate. 

04.105  Disqualification : 


704 


(1)  Any  party  may  tile  a  petition  with  the  Board  to  disqualify  any  hearing 
officer.  The  Board  shall  determine  the  petition  in  accordance  with  this  sub- 
section and  enter  its  decision  on  the  record. 

(2)  The  Board  may,  for  good  cause,  revoke  the  appointment  of  any  hearing 
officer  upon  the  tiling  of  a  petition  of  a  party  or  upon  the  Board's  own  motion. 
Any  such  revocation  shall  be  effective  upon  notice  to  the  officer. 

(3)  A  hearing  officer  shall  withdraw  from  participation  in  a  hearing  at  any 
time  prior  to  the  final  determination  if  he  deems  himself  disqualified  for  any 
reason. 

(4)  Whenever  a  hearing  officer  withdraws  or  is  disqualified,  the  Board  shall 
.appoint  another  in  his  place,  without  the  need  for  such  newly  appointed  officer 
hearing  evidence  already  presented  in  the  case. 

04.200  Discovery: 

04.201  Agency  Discovery 

(1)  Information 

Upon  request  of  the  Board  or  the  hearing  officer,  any  party  to  the  matter  shall 
furnish  to  the  Board  or  the  hearing  officer  any  information  which  the  party 
may  have  which  is  relevant  to  the  matter  under  consideration. 

(2)  Examination  of  Records 

Upon  request  of  the  Board  or  the  hearing  officer,  any  party  shall  allow  the 
Board  or  any  member,  employee,  or  agent  of  the  Board,  when  authorized  by  it 
or  the  hearing  officer,  or  the  officer  himself,  to  examine  and  copy  any  books, 
papers,  records  or  memoranda  pertaining  to  the  matter  under  consideration. 

(3)  Inspection  of  Premises 

Upon  request  of  the  Board  or  the  hearing  officer,  any  party  shall  allow  the 
Board  or  any  member,  employee,  or  agent  of  the  Board  when  authorized  by 
it  or  the  hearing  officer,  or  the  hearing  officer  himself,  to  enter  upon  any  of 
the  party's  property  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  information,  examining  any 
physical  facility,  or  examining  records  or  conducting  surveys  or  investiga- 
tions. 

04.202  Discovery  by  Parties  : 

(1)  Parties  other  than  the  Board  may  obtain  discovery  by  examination  of 
those  public  records  which  are  in  possession  of  the  hearing  officer  or  the 
Board.  Any  party  to  a  case  may  request  the  Board  or  the  hearing  officer  to 
exercise  its  powers  in  subsection  04.201(1)  to  obtain  public  information  or  to 
issue  a  subpoena  as  provided  in  05.300.  The  Board  or  the  hearing  officer  may 
grant  or  deny  such  requests.  A  party  may  request  voluntary  disclosure  of 
information  by  any  other  party. 

(2)  The  deposition  of  any  witness  or  party  required  in  any  proceeding 
before  the  Board  may  be  taken  in  the  same  manner  and  on  the  same  notice 
as  in  an  action  pending  in  the  district  courts  of  this  state.  Any  person  whose 
deposition  is  taken  shall  receive  the  same  fees  and  mileage  as  a  witness  in 
a  civil  case  in  the  district  courts  and  such  costs  shall  be  paid  by  the  party 
at  whose  insistence  the  deposition  is  taken. 

(3)  Interrogatories  may  be  issued,  in  any  proceeding  before  the  Board,  in 
the  same  manner  as  in  an  action  pending  in  tbe  district  courts  of  this  state. 

04.300  Appearance:  Interested  parties  shall  enter  their  appearances  at  the 
beginning  of  tbe  hearing  by  giving  their  name  and  address  and  briefly  stating 
whether  they  appear  in  support  of  the  complaint  or  in  opposition  thereto,  or 
otherwise.  All  such  appearances  shall  be  noted  on  the  record  with  a  notation 
in  whose  behalf  each  appearance  is  made.  Included  in  such  appearances  shall  be 
the  names  of  the  members  of  the  Board's  staff  participating  in  the  hearing  of  in- 
vestigation and  the  names  of  any  other  persons  appearing  for  the  Board. 

04.400  Continuance :  Before  or  after  any  hearing,  continuances  may  be  granted 
by  the  Board  for  good  and  sufficient  cause.  A  motion  for  such  a  continuance  shall 
l>e  made  in  writing,  filed  with  the  Board,  and  served  on  opposing  counsel  or  parties. 
Such  motions  shall  be  presented  as  far  in  advance  of  date  fixed  for  hearing  as  pos- 
sible to  insure  favorable  action.  The  Board  may  affect  a  continuance  before  or 
after  any  hearing  upon  its  own  motion.  The  hearing  officer  may  grant  oral  or  writ- 
ten requests  for  continuances  during  any  hearing. 

04.500  Order  of  Procedure :  In  hearings  on  formal  complaints  and  petitions, 
fho  complainant  or  petitioner,  as  the  case  may  be,  shall  open  and  close.  In  hear- 
ings on  an  older  to  show  cause,  the  respondent  shall  open  and  close.  When  pro- 
ceedings have  been  consolidated  for  hearing,  the  officer  shall  designate  who  shall 
open  and  close.  Intervenors  shall  follow  the  parties  in  whose  behalf  the  interven- 
tion is  made;  where  the  intervention  is  not  in  support  of  an  original  party,  the 


705 


presiding  officer  shall  designate  at  which  stage  such  intervenor  shall  be  heard.  In 
proceedings  where  the  evidence  is  materially  within  the  knowledge  or  control  of 
another  party  or  participant,  the  foregoing  order  or  presentation  may  be  varied 
by  the  officer. 

04.600  Appeal  to  Board  From  Ruling  of  Hearing  Officer — Offer  of  Proof :  An 
appeal  may  be  taken  to  the  Board  from  a  ruling  officer  during  the  course  of  a 
hearing  only  where  extraordinary  circumstances  necessitate  a  prompt  decision 
by  the  Board  to  prevent  detriment  to  the  public  interest. 

Any  offer  of  proof  made  in  connection  with  an  objection  taken  to  any  ruling 
of  the  hearing  officer  rejecting  or  excluding  proffered  oral  testimony  shall  consist 
of  a  statement  of  the  substance  of  the  evidence  which  counsel  contends  would  be 
adduced  by  such  testimony ;  and,  if  the  excluded  evidence  in  documentary 
or  written  form  or  reference  to  documents  or  records,  a  copy  of  such  evidence 
shall  be  marked  for  identification  and  shall  constitute  the  offer  of  proof. 

04.700  Oral  Argument : 

04.701  Before  Officer  :  When,  in  the  opinion  of  the  hearing  officer,  time  permits, 
and  the  nature  of  the  proceedings,  the  complexity  or  the  importance  of  the  issues 
of  fact  or  law  involved,  and  the  public  interest  warrant,  such  officer  may,  either  on 
on  his  own  motion,  or  at  the  request  of  any  party  at  or  before  the  close  of  the  taking 
of  testimony,  allow  and  fix  a  time  for  the  presentation  of  oral  argument  imposing 
such  limits  of  time  on  the  argument  as  deemed  appropriate.  Such  arguments 
shall  be  transcribed  and  bound  with  -the  transcript  of  testimony,  if  a  transcript 
is  prepared. 

04.702  Before  Board :  Request  for  authority  to  present  oral  argument  before 
the  Board  may  be  made  at  the  time  of  any  appeal  taken  during  the  hearing,  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  taking  or  evidence,  or  on  brief,  at  such  time  as  the  Board  may 
allow.  The  Board  will  fix  the  time  for  oral  argument,  if  allowed  and  notify  the 
parties. 

04.800  Briefs,  Proposed  Findings  of  Fact  and  Conclusions  of  Law  : 

04.801  Each  party  to  any  proceeding  may  file  proposed  findings  of  fact  and 
conclusions  of  law,  briefs,  or  memoranda  of  law ;  provided,  however,  that  the 
Board  or  hearing  officer  may  direct  any  party  to  file  proposed  findings  of  fact  and 
conclusions  of  law,  briefs,  or  memoranda  of  law. 

04.802  The  Board  or  hearing  officer  shall  fix  the  time  for  the  filing  and  service 
of  proposed  findings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of  law,  briefs,  or  memoranda  of  law, 
giving  due  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  proceeding,  the  magnitude  of  the  record, 
and  the  complexity  or  importance  of  the  issues  involved,  and  he  shall  fix  the  order 
in  which  such  documents  shall  be  filed. 

04.803  Should  a  party  find  that  it  is  unable  to  meet  the  date  for  filing  and 
serving  proposed  findings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of  law,  briefs,  or  memoranda 
of  law,  such  party  shall  so  notify  the  Board  or  hearing  officer  and  the  other 
parties  in  writing,  therein  setting  forth  the  reasons  for  such  inability  together 
with  a  request  for  an  extension  of  time  to  a  date  certain  for  filing  and  service. 

04.804  When  it  is  ordered  that  proposed  findings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of 
law,  briefs,  or  memoranda  of  law  be  filed  and  served  by  the  party  initiating  the 
proceeding,  and  where  such  party  fails  to  file  and  serve  by  the  date  specified  with- 
out complying  with  04.803  above,  the  Board  on  its  own  motion  or  the  motion  of 
any  party  may,  in  its  discretion,  dismiss  the  proceeding.  Such  failure  in  the  case 
of  an  intervenor,  protestant,  or  respondent  may  be  deemed  a  waiver  of  the  right 
to  participate  further  in  the  proceeding,  and  the  Board  on  its  own  motion  or  the 
motion  of  any  party  may  so  order. 

04.805  Exhibits  should  not  be  reproduced  in  a  brief,  but  may,  if  desired,  be 
reproduced  in  an  appendix  to  the  brief.  Every  brief  of  more  than  twenty  pages 
shall  contain  a  subject  index,  with  page  references,  and  the  pages  where  the 
citations  appear.  All  briefs  shall  be  as  concise  as  possible. 

04.806  All  briefs  shall  be  accompanied  by  certificate  showing  service  upon  all 
parties  or  their  attorneys  who  appeared  at  the  hearing.  One  copy  of  each  brief 
shall  be  furnished  for  the  use  of  the  Board  unless  otherwise  directed  by  the  Board 
or  hearing  officer. 

04.900  Decisions  of  the  Board :  In  all  cases  in  which  more  than  one  member 
or  employee  of  the  Board  shall  act  as  hearing  officer,  only  an  odd  number  of 
members  or  employees  shall  so  act.  In  all  cases  in  which  any  matter  shall  be 
heard  by  more  than  one  hearing  officer,  sitting  jointly,  and  in  all  cases  in  which 
the  Board  shall  rule  on  any  issue,  motion,  or  objection,  the  decision  of  the  Board 
shall  be  determined  by  vote. 


706 


R2 8-3 2-0 5  EVIDENCE 

05.100  Rules :  The  admissibility  of  evidence  shall  be  determined  generally  in 
accordance  with  the  practice  in  the  district  courts  of  this  state,  except  to  the  ex- 
tent that  these  rules  conflict  therewith.  However  the  Board  or  the  hearing  officer 
may  waive  the  usual  common  law  or  statutory  rules  of  evidence  where  such  waiver 
is  necessary  to  ascertain  the  substantial  rights  of  the  public  and  interested 
parties.  When  objection  is  made  to  the  admissibility  of  evidence,  the  hearing 
officer  shall  receive  such  evidence  subject  to  later  ruling  by  the  Board. 

05.200  Witnesses :  Witnesses  will  be  orally  examined  under  oath  before  the 
Board  or  hearing  officer.  Testimony  may  also  be  taken  by  deposition  as  provided 
in  04.202(2)  hereof.  Written  testimony  of  any  witness  may  be  received  when 
properly  supported  by  the  oral  testimony  of  its  author. 

05.300  Subpena  :  Subpenas  for  the  attendance  of  witnesses  or  for  the  production 
of  documentary  evidence,  unless  directed  by  the  Board  upon  its  own  motion,  will 
issue  only  upon  application  in  writing  to  the  Board,  or  to  the  hearing  officer, 
except  that  during  a  hearing  such  application  may  be  made  orally  on  the  record 
before  the  hearing  officer  who  shall  have  the  authority  to  determine  the  relevancy 
and  the  materiality  of  the  evidence  sought  and  to  issue  such  subpoenas  if  war- 
ranted. Written  application  shall  specify  the  general  relevance  and  materiality 
of  the  testimony  or  documentary  evidence  sought,  including,  as  to  documentary 
evidence,  specifications  as  nearly  as  may  be  of  the  documents  desired  and  the 
facts  to  be  proved  by  them.  The  cost  of  serving  any  subpoena  shall  be  paid  by 
the  party  requesting  it.  Any  witness  who  is  subpoenaed  under  the  provisions  of 
this  rule  and  who  appears  at  the  hearing  shall  receive  the  same  fees  and  mileage 
as  witnesses  in  the  district  courts  of  this  state,  and  such  cost  will  be  paid  by 
the  part  at  whose  insistence  the  witness  appears.  No  witness  fees  will  be  allowed 
except  on  a  subpoena. 

05.400  Stipulations :  The  parties  to  any  proceeding  or  investigation  before  the 
Board  may,  by  stipulation  in  writing,  filed  with  the  Board  or  orally  entered  in  the 
record,  agree  upon  the  facts,  or  any  portion  thereof  involved  in  the  controversy, 
and  any  such  stipulation  may  be  received  in  evidence  at  a  hearing  and  when 
so  received,  shall  be  binding  upon  the  parties  with  respect  to  the  matters  stipu- 
lated therein. 

05.500  Documentary  Evidence : 

05.501  Where  relevant  and  material  matter  offered  in  evidence  by  any  party  is 
embraced  in  a  book,  paper,  or  a  document  containing  other  matter  not  material 
or  relevant,  the  party  must  designate  the  matter  so  offered.  If  the  other  matter 
is  in  such  volume  as  wTould  unnecessarily  encumber  the  record,  such  book,  paper 
or  document  will  not  be  received  in  evidence  but  may  be  marked  for  identifica- 
tion and,  if  properly  authenticated,  the  relevant  and  material  matter  may  be 
read  into  the  record,  or  if  the  Board  or  hearing  officer  directs,  a  true  copy  of 
such  matter  in  proper  form  shall  be  received  as  an  exhibit  and  like  copies  de- 
livered by  the  party  offering  the  same  to  all  parties  or  their  attorneys  appearing 
at  the  hearing  who  shall  be  afforded  an  opportunity  to  examine  the  entire  book, 
paper,  or  document  and  to  offer  in  evidence  in  like  manner  any  portions  thereof 
found  to  be  material  and  relevant. 

05.502  Any  matter  contained  on  a  report  or  other  official  document  on  file  with 
the  Board  may  be  offered  in  evidence  by  merely  identifying  the  report,  document, 
or  other  file  containing  the  matter  so  offered. 

05.600  Exhibits: 

05.601  Exhibits  must  be  on  paper  of  good  quality  and  so  prepared  as  to  be 
plainly  legible  and  durable  whether  printed,  typewritten,  mimeographed,  photo- 
graphed or  otherwise,  and  if  possible  should  be  folded  to  a  size  not  to  exceed 
8%  by  14  inches.  Whenever  practicable,  the  sheets  of  each  exhibit  and  line  of 
each  sheet  should  be  numbered,  and  if  the  exhibit  consists  of  five  or  more  sheets, 
the  first  sheet  or  title  page  should  contain  a  brief  statement  of  what  the  exhibit 
purports  to  Show  with  reference  by  sheet  and  line  to  illustrative  or  typical  exam- 
ple contained  in  the  exhibit.  Whenever  practicable,  documents  produced  by  a 
single  witness  shall  he  assembled  and  bound  together  suitably  arranged  and 
Indexed  so  that  they  may  he  identified  and  offered  as  one  exhibit.  The  source  of  all 
material  contained  in  any  exhibit  should  he  definitely  shown. 

05.602  Two  copies  of  each  exhibit  will  be  furnished  for  the  use  of  the  Board 
whenever  it  shall  request;  copies  must  also  be  available  for  all  parties  of  record 
in  a  proceeding 

05.700  Official  Notice  :  The  Board  or  the  examiner  may  take  notice  of  any  fact 
or  facts  set  forth  in  duly  established  regulations,  annual  reports,  or  any  statisti- 


707 


cal  data  to  which  reference  is  made  on  the  record  at  the  hearing  or  any  facts 
which  are  judicially  noticed  by  the  courts  of  this  state,  as  set  forth  in  Section 
31-10-02. 

R2  8-3 2-0 6  REOPENING,  REHEARING,  REVIEW 

06.100  Petition  to  Reopen :  At  any  time  after  the  conclusion  of  a  hearing,  but 
before  entry  of  the  final  order  by  the  Board,  any  party  to  a  proceeding  may  file 
with  the  Board  a  petition  to  reopen  the  proceeding  for  the  purpose  of  taking 
additional  evidence. 

06.101  Such  petition  shall  set  forth  clearly  the  facts  claimed  to  constitute  the 
grounds  requiring  reopening  of  the  proceeding,  including  the  material  changes  of 
fact  or  law  alleged  to  have  occurred  since  the  conclusion  of  the  hearing. 

06.102  A  copy  of  the  petition  to  reopen  shall  be  served  by  the  petitioning  party 
upon  all  parties  to  the  proceedings  or  their  attorneys  of  record,  and  a  certificate 
to  that  effect  will  be  attached  to  the  petition  when  filed  with  the  Board. 

06.103  Within  ten  days  following  the  service  of  any  petition  to  reopen,  any 
other  party  to  the  proceeding  may  file  with  the  Board  his  answer  thereto.  Any 
party  not  filing  such  answer  is  in  default  thereof  and  shall  be  deemed  to  have 
waived  any  objection  to  the  granting  of  such  petition. 

If,  after  the  hearing  in  a  proceeding,  either  before  or  after  the  issuance  of  its 
final  order,  or  if  no  hearing  has  been  held,  only  after  the  issuance  of  its  final 
order,  the  Board  shall  have  reason  to  believe  the  conditions  of  fact  or  law  have 
so  changed  as  to  require,  or  that  public  interest  requires,  the  reopening  of  such 
proceeding,  the  Board  may  issue  an  order  for  the  reopening  of  the  same. 

The  Board  shall  act  on  any  petition  to  reopen  within  ten  days  of  receipt 
thereof  and  may,  in  its  discretion,  hear  oral  argument  on  any  such  petition. 

06.200  Petition  for  Rehearing  : 

06.201  A  petition  for  rehearing  of  a  proceeding  must  be  filed  within  fifteen 
days  after  a  copy  of  the  final  order  has  been  sent  to  the  petitioning  party  by  the 
Board. 

06.202  Such  petition  shall  state  concisely  the  alleged  errors  in  the  Board's  de- 
cision or  order  and  the  specific  grounds  relied  upon  by  the  petitioner.  If  an  order 
of  the  Board  is  sought  to  be  vacated,  reversed,  or  modified  by  reason  of  matters 
that  have  arisen  since  the  hearing  and  decision  or  order,  or  by  reason  of  a  conse- 
quence that  would  result  from  the  compliance  therewith,  the  matters  relied  upon 
by  the  petitioner  shall  be  set  forth  in  the  petition. 

06.203  A  petition  for  rehearing  shall  be  served  by  the  petitioner  upon  all 
parties  to  the  proceeding  or  their  attorneys  of  record. 

06.204  Within  ten  days  following  the  service  of  such  petition,  any  party  to  the 
proceeding  may  file  with  the  Board  his  answer  thereto.  Any  party  not  filing  such 
an  answer  is  in  default  thereof  and  shall  be  deemed  to  have  waived  any  objection 
to  the  granting  of  such  petition. 

06.205  The  Board  shall  act  on  any  petition  for  rehearing  within  ten  days  of 
receipt  thereof  and  may,  in  its  discretion,  hear  oral  argument  on  such  petition. 

06.300  Appeal :  Any  party  to  a  proceeding  conducted  pursuant  to  these  rules  or 
other  provisions  of  Chapter  28-32  shall  have  the  right  of  appeal,  in  the  manner 
provided  in  Chapter  28-32,  from  any  adverse  ruling  by  the  Board.  Such  appeal 
shall  not  be  a  trial  de  novo  but  shall  be  limited  to  the  hearing  record  and  to  those 
issues  specified  in  Section  28-32-19. 

Utah 

State  of  Utah,  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  Division  of  Water 
Resources  Rules,  Regulations,  and  Procedures 

cloud  seeding  resolution 

Whereas,  the  Utah  Cloud  Seeding  Act  of  1973,  Laws  of  Utah,  Chapter  193, 
authorizes  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  to  adopt  such  rules  and  regula- 
tions as  are  necessary  in  the  performance  of  its  powers  and  duties  pursuant  to 
the  Cloud  Seeding  to  Increase  Precipitation  Act  and 

Whereas,  after  careful  deliberation  and  extensive  study,  the  Utah  Division  of 
Water  Resources  has  prepared  such  rules  and  regulations  and  has  circulated 
same  so  far  as  practical  to  interested  governmental  bodies,  groups,  and  indi- 
viduals for  their  information  and  comments  ;  and 

Whereas,  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  has  considered  and  deliberated 
on  the  form  and  content  of  each  proposed  rule  in  the  light  of  any  and  all  sugges- 
tions from  its  staff,  and  other  interested  persons ;  and 


708 


Whereas,  the  Utah  Board  of  Water  Resources  at  its  regular  meeting  on  Septem- 
ber 26,  1973,  considered  the  proposed  Rules  and  Regulations  Relating  to  Cloud 
Seeding  Activities  ;  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  That  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  adopt  the  following 
Rules  and  Regulations  relating  to  the  Utah  Cloud  Seeding  Act  of  1973  on  an 
interim  basis,  until  such  time  as  experience  shows  that  the  Rules  should  be 
modified. 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  above  Resolution  was  adopted  by  the  Utah  Division 
of  Water  Resources  on  September  26, 1973. 

Daniel  F.  Lawrence, 
Director,  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

Definitions 

1.  "Act"  or  "Cloud  Seeding  Act"  means  the  1973  Cloud  Seeding  To  Increase 
Precipitation  Act,  Laws  of  Utah,  Chapter  193. 

2.  "Cloud  Seeding"  or  "Weather  Modification"  means  all  acts  undertaken  to 
artificially  distribute  or  create  nuclei  in  cloud  masses  for  the  purposes  of  altering 
precipitation,  cloud  forms,  or  other  meteorological  parameters. 

3.  "Cloud  Seeding  Project"  means  a  planned  project  to  evaluate  meteorological 
conditions,  perform  cloud  seeding,  and  evaluate  results. 

4.  "Board"  means  the  Utah  Board  of  Water  Resources,  which  is  the  policy 
making  body  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

5.  "Director"  means  the  Director  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

6.  "Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources"  means  the  Director  and  staff  of  the  Utah 
Division  of  Water  Resources. 

7.  "License"  means  a  certificate  issued  by  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resource?? 
certifying  that  the  holder  has  met  the  minimum  requirements  in  cloud  seeding 
technology  set  forth  by  the  State  of  Utah,  and  is  qualified  to  apply  for  a  permit 
for  a  cloud  seeding  project. 

8.  "Licensed  Contractor"  means  a  person  or  organization  duly  licensed  for  cloud 
seeding  activities  in  the  State  of  Utah. 

9.  "Permit"  means  a  certification  of  project  approval  to  conduct  a  specific  cloud 
seeding  project  within  the  State  under  the  conditions  and  within  the  limitations 
required  and  established  under  the  provision  of  these  Rules. 

10.  "Sponsor"  means  the  responsible  individual  or  organization  that  enters  into 
an  agreement  with  a  licensed  contractor  to  implement  a  cloud  seeding  project 

Chapter  I 

GENERAL  PROVISIONS 

1.  Authority  :  The  State  of  Utah  through  the  Division  of  Water  Resources  shall 
be  the  only  entity,  private  or  public,  that  shall  have  authority  to  authorize,  spon- 
sor, and/or  develop  cloud  seeding  research,  evaluation,  or  implementation  projects 
to  alter  precipitation,  cloud  forms,  or  meteorological  parameters  within  the  State 
of  Utah. 

2.  Ownership  of  Water :  All  water  derived  as  a  result  of  cloud  seeding  shall  be 
considered  as  a  part  of  Utah's  basic  water  supply  the  same  as  all  natural  precipi- 
tation water  supplies  have  been  heretofore,  and  all  statutory  provisions  that 
apply  to  water  from  natural  precipitation  shall  also  apply  to  water  derived  from 
cloud  seeding. 

3.  Notice  to  State  Engineer :  The  Director  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Re- 
sources shall,  by  written  communication,  notify  the  Director  of  the  Utah  Division 
of  Water  Rights  of  any  applications  for  cloud  seeding  permits  within  ten  (10) 
days  of  receiving  such  applications. 

4.  Consultation  and  Assistance :  The  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  may 
contract  with  the  Utah  Water  Research  Laboratory,  or  any  other  individual  or 
organization,  for  consultation  and/or  assistance  in  developing  cloud  seeding 
projects  or  in  furthering  necessary  research  of  cloud  seeding  or  other  factors 
that  may  be  affected  by  cloud  seeding  activities. 

5.  State  and  County  Cooperation  :  The  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  shall 
encourage,  cooperate,  and  work  with  individual  counties,  multi-county  districts 
for  planning  and  development,  and  groups  of  counties  in  the  development  of  cloud 
seeding  projects  and  issuance  of  permits. 


709 


6.  Statewide  or  Area  wide  Cloud  Seeding  Project :  The  State  of  Utah  through 
the  Division  of  Water  Resources  reserves  the  right  to  develop  Statewide  or  area- 
wide  cloud  seeding  programs  where  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  may 
contract  directly  with  licensed  contractors  to  increase  precipitation.  The  Utah 
Division  of  Water  Resources  may  also  work  with  individual  counties,  multi- 
county  districts  for  planning  and  development,  organizations  or  groups  of  coun- 
ties, or  private  organizations,  to  develop  Statewide  or  areawide  cloud  seeding 
projects. 

7.  Liability : 

(a)  Trespass. — The  mere  dissemination  of  materials  and  substances  into 
the  atmosphere  or  causing  precipitation  pursuant  to  an  authorized  cloud 
seeding  project,  shall  not  give  rise  to  any  presumption  that  such  use  of  the 
atmosphere  or  lands  constitutes  trespass  or  involves  an  actionable  or  enjoin- 
able  public  or  private  nuisance. 

(b)  Immunity. — Nothing  in  these  Rules  and  Regulations  shall  be  con- 
strued to  impose  or  accept  any  liability  or  responsibility  on  the  part  of  the 
State  of  Utah  or  any  of  its  agencies,  or  any  State  officials  or  State  employees 
or  cloud  seeding  authorities,  for  any  weather  modification  activities  of  any 
person  or  licensed  contractor  as  defined  in  these  Rules  and  Regulations  as 
provided  by  Laws  of  Utah,  Chapter  63. 

8.  Rules: 

(a)  Purpose. — The  Rules  contained  herein  are  adopted  for  the  purpose  of 
ensuring  both  continued  research  and  appropriate  application  of  weather 
modification  technology  to  the  needs  of  Utah,  and  for  minimizing  the  danger 
of  weather  modification  activities  to  health  and  property,  thus  facilitating 
administration  and  enforcement  of  the  State  of  Utah  Cloud  Seeding  Act  of 
1973,  Laws  of  Utah,  Chapter  193. 

(&)  Use  and  Limitation. — These  Rules  are  prescribed  for  the  performance 
of  the  statutory  powers  and  functions  vested  in  the  Utah  Division  of  Water 
Resources.  In  no  event  shall  any  Rule,  or  Ru^s,  be  construed  as  a  limitation 
or  restriction  upon  the  exercise  of  any  statutory  power  of  the  Utah  Division 
of  Water  Resources. 

(c)  Suspension  and  Waiver  of  Rules. — The  Utah  Division  of  Water  Re- 
sources may  suspend  or  waive  a  Rule,  in  whole  or  in  part,  upon  a  showing 
of  good  cause ;  or  when,  in  the  discretion  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water 
Resources,  the  particular  facts  or  circumstances  render  such  suspension  or 
waiver  of  the  Rule  appropriate. 

(d)  Amending  of  Rules. — These  Rules  may  be  amended  from  time  to  time 
and  new  Rules  may  be  adopted  by  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

Chapter  II 

UTAH  BOARD  OF  WATER  RESOURCES 

1.  Review  of  License  and  Permit :  The  Board  may  review  applications  for 
Licenses  and  Permits  and  submit  recommendations  to  the  Director  for  his  con- 
sideration for  action  on  the  applications. 

2.  Policy  Recommendations:  The  Board  may  advise  and  make  recommenda- 
tions concerning  legislation,  policies,  administration,  research,  and  other  matters 
related  to  cloud  seeding  and  weather  modification  activities  to  the  Director  and 
technical  staff  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

Chapter  III 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ADVISORY  COMMITTEE 

1.  Creation  of  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Committee :  An  advisory  com- 
mittee may  be  created  by  the  Director  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 
Members  of  this  committee  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Director,  and  serve  for  a 
period  of  time  as  determined  by  the  Director. 

2.  Duties  of  Weather  Modification  Advisory  Committee : 

(a)  Advise  the  Director  and  technical  staff  of  the  Utah  Division  of  Water 
Resources  on  application  for  licenses  and  permits ; 

(b)  Advise  and  make  recommendations  concerning  legislation,  policies, 
administration,  research,  and  other  matters  related  to  cloud  seeding  and 
weather  modification  activities  to  the  Director  and  technical  staff  of  the 
Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 


710 


Chapter  IV 

LICENSE  AND  PERMIT  REQUIRED 

1.  License  and  Permit  Required :  It  is  unlawful  for  any  person  or  organization, 
not  specifically  exempted  by  law  and  these  Rules,  to  act  or  perform  services  as  a 
weather  modifier,  without  obtaining  a  license  and  permit  as  provided  for  in  the 
Cloud  Seeding  Act  and  these  Rules. 

2.  To  Whom  License  May  Be  Issued :  Licenses  to  engage  in  activities  for 
weather  modification  and  control  shall  be  issued  to  applicants  who  meet  the 
requirements  set  out  in  the  Act  and  Chapter  V  of  these  Rules.  If  the  applicant 
is  an  organization,  these  requirements  shall  be  met  by  the  individual  or  indi- 
viduals who  are  to  be  in  control  and  in  charge  of  the  applicant's  weather  modifi- 
cation operations. 

3.  To  Whom  Permit  May  Be  Issued :  A  permit  may  be  issued  to  a  licensed 
contractor  as  prescribed  in  Chapter  VI  of  these  Rules. 

4.  License  and  Permit  Not  Required :  Individuals  and  organizations  engaging 
in  the  following  activities,  and  only  the  for  owing  activities,  are  exempt  from 
the  license  and  permit  requirements  of  these  Rules  : 

(a)  Research  performed  wholly  within  laboratory  facilities; 

(b)  Cloud  Seeding  activities  for  the  suppression  of  fog ; 

(c)  Fire  fighting  activities  where  water  or  chemical  preparations  are 
applied  directly  to  fires,  without  intent  to  modify  the  weather ; 

(d)  Frost  and  fog  protective  measures  provided  through  the  application 
of  water  and/or  heat  by  orchard  heaters  or  similar  devices,  or  by  mixing 
of  the  lower  layers  of  the  atmosphere  by  helicopters  or  other  type  of  aircraft 
where  no  chemical  are  dispensed  into  the  atmosphere,  other  than  normal 
combustion  by-products  and  engine  exhaust ;  and 

(e)  Inadvertent  weather  modification  (such  as  emissions  from  industrial 
stacks.) 

5.  Effective  Period  of  License :  Each  license  shall  be  issued  for  a  period  of  one 
(1)  year.  A  licensee  may  renew  an  expired  license  in  the  manner  prescribed  by 
these  rules. 

6.  Effective  Period  of  Permit :  Each  permit  shall  be  issued  for  a  period  as 
required  by  a  proposed  cloud  seeding  project,  but  not  exceeding  one  (1)  year. 

Chapter  V 

PROCEDURES  FOR  ACQUISITION  AND  RENEWAL  OF  LICENSE 

1.  Application  for  License :  In  order  to  qualify  for  a  cloud  seeding  license  an 
applicant  must : 

(a)  Submit  a  properly  completed  application  to  the  Utah  Division  of  Water 
Resources ;  and 

(b)  Submit  to  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  evidence  of  (1)  the 
possession  by  the  applicant  of  a  baccalaureate  or  higher  degree  in  meteor- 
ology or  related  physical  science  or  engineering  and  at  least  five  years' 
experience  in  the  field  of  meteorology,  or  (2)  such  other  training  and  ex- 
perience as  may  be  acceptable  to  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  as 
indicative  of  sufficient  competence  in  the  field  of  meteorology  to  engage  in 
cloud  seeding  activities. 

2.  Renewal  of  License :  A  licensee  may  qualify  for  a  renewal  of  a  license  by 
submitting  an  application  for  renewal.  In  the  case  of  an  organization,  the  appli- 
cation for  renewal  must  state  whether  the  personnel,  on  the  basis  of  whose  quali- 
fications  the  original  license  was  issued,  continue  to  be  in  control  and  in  charge 
of  the  organization's  cloud  seeding  operations ;  or,  if  the  organization  has  ac- 
quired replacement  personnel,  that  there  has  been  a  change  in  personnel.  If  the 
organization  has  hired  replacement  personnel,  the  organization  shall  attach  to 
its  application  for  renewal  a  statement  setting  forth  the  names  and  qualifica- 
tions of  said  personnel.  Licensee  should  file  an  application  for  renewal  thirty 
(30)  days  prior  to  the  expiration  date  of  his  license. 

Chapter  VI 

PROCEDURES   FOR   ACQUISITION   OF  PERMIT 

1.  Application  for  Permit :  In  order  to  qualify  for  receipt  of  a  cloud  seeding 
permit  a  licensee  must : 


711 


(a)  Submit  a  properly  completed  letter  of  application  to  the  Utah  Division 
of  Water  Resources,  which  shall  include  the  name  and  qualifications  of  the 
person  or  persons  who  will  be  in  control  of,  and  in  charge  of  the  operations 
for  the  licensee.  These  qualifications  shall  comply  with  Chapter  V  Section  B-l 
of  these  Rules  and  Regulations ; 

(b)  Demonstrate  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Director  his  ability  to  respond 
in  damages  for  liability  which  might  reasonably  arise  as  a  result  of  the  ap- 
plicant's proposed  cloud  seeding  activities  ; 

(c)  File  a  copy  of  the  contract  or  proposed  contract  between  the  sponsor 
and  licensed  contractor  relating  to  the  project ; 

(d)  Submit  copies  of  all  pamphlets  and  promotional  material  distributed 
in  connection  with  the  project ; 

(e)  Submit  the  plan  of  operation  for  the  project,  including  a  map  showing 
locations  of  all  equipment  to  be  used  as  well  as  equipment  descriptions ; 

(f)  Receive  preliminary  approval  of  the  project  from  the  Director  before 
proceeding  with  notices  of  intent  described  in  Chapter  VI,  Item  1,  (g)  and 
(h)  of  these  Rules. 

(g)  File  with  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  and  the  Utah  Division 
of  Water  Rights  a  notice  of  intention  for  publication  which  sets  forth  at  least 
all  of  the  following : 

(1)  the  name  and  address  of  the  applicant ; 

(2)  the  date  he  received  a  proper  cloud  seeding  license,  and  all  dates  of 
renewal ; 

(3)  the  nature  and  the  object  of  the  intended  operations,  aind  the  per- 
son or  organization  on  whose  behalf  it  is  to  be  conducted  ; 

(4)  the  specific  area  in  which,  and  the  approximate  date  and  time 
during  which,  the  operation  will  be  conducted  ; 

(5)  the  specific  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation  ; 

(6)  the  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation  ; 
and 

(7)  a  statement  that  persons  interested  in  such  permit  application 
should  contact  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

(h)  File  with  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources,  within  fifteen  (15) 
days  from  the  last  date  of  the  publication  of  notice,  proof  that  the  applicant 
caused  the  notice  of  intention  to  be  published  at  least  once  a  week  for  three 
(3)  consecutive  weeks  in  a  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  within 
each  county  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and  in  which  the 
affected  area  is  located.  Publication  of  notice  shall  not  commence  until  the 
applicant  has  received  approval  of  the  form  and  substance  of  the  notice  of 
intention  from  the  Director. 

2.  Issuance  of  a  Permit :  A  permit  shall  not  be  issued  prior  to  the  expiration  of 
ten  (10)  days  following  the  last  date  of  publication  of  the  notice  of  intent. 

3.  Description  of  Permit :  A  licensee  shall  comply  with  all  the  requirements  set 
out  in  his  permit.  A  permit  shall  include  the  following  : 

(a)  The  effective  period  of  the  permit,  which  shall  not  exceed  one  year ; 

(b)  The  location  of  the  operation  ; 

(c)  The  method  (s)  which  may  be  employed  :  and 

(d)  Other  necessary  terms,  requirements,  and  conditions. 

4.  Authority  to  Amend  a  Permit :  The  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  may 
amend  the  terms  of  a  permit  after  issuance  thereof  if  the  Utah  Division  of  Water 
Resources  determines  that  it  is  in  the  public  interest. 

Chapter  VII 

REVOCATION   AND   SUSPENSION  OF  LICENSES  AND  PERMITS 

1.  Automatic  suspension  of  a  Permit :  Any  cloud  seeding  permit  issued  under  the 
terms  of  these  Rules  shall  be  suspended  automatically  if  the  licensee's  cloud 
seeding  license  should  expire,  or  in  the  case  of  an  organization  being  the  licensee, 
if  the  person  listed  on  the  application  for  the  permit  as  being  in  control  of.  and  in 
charge  of,  operations  for  the  licensee  should  become  incapacitated,  leave  the  em- 
ployment of  the  licensee,  or  for  any  other  reason  be  unable  to  continue  to  be  in 
control  of,  and  in  charge  of,  the  operation  in  question ;  and  a  replacement,  ap- 
proved by  the  Director,  has  not  been  obtained. 

2.  Reinstatement  of  Permit :  A  permit  which  is  suspended  under  Chapter  VII, 
Item  1,  may  be,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Director,  reinstated  following  renewal  of 


712 


the  expired  license,  or  submission  of  an  amended  personnel  statement  nominating 
a  person  whose  qualifications  for  controlling  and  being  in  charge  of  the  operation 
are  acceptable  to  the  Director. 

3.  Director's  Authority  to  Suspend  or  Revoke  Licenses  and  Permits:  The 
Director  may  suspend  or  revoke  any  existing  license  or  permit  for  the  following 
reasons : 

(a)  If  the  licensee  no  longer  possesses  the  qualifications  necessary  for  the 
issuance  of  a  license  or  permit ; 

(b)  If  the  licensee  has  violated  any  of  the  provisions  of  the  Cloud  Seeding 

Act; 

(c)  If  the  licensee  has  violated  any  of  the  provisions  of  these  Rules ;  or 

(d)  If  the  licensee  has  violated  any  provisions  of  his  license  and/or  permit. 

Chapter  VIII 

RECORD  KEEPING  AND  REPORTS 

1.  Information  To  Be  Recorded :  Any  individual  or  organization  conducting 
weather  modification  operations  in  Utah  shall  keep  and  maintain  a  record  of 
each  operation  which  he  conducts.  For  the  purposes  of  this  Chapter,  the  daily 
log  required  by  Title  15,  Chapter  IX,  Sub-Chapter  A,  Part  908,  Section  908.8  (a), 
Code  of  Federal  Regulations,  November  1, 1972,  as  amended,  and  the  supplemental 
information  required  by  Sections  908.8  (b),  (c),  and  (d)  will  be  considered  ade- 
quate, provided  that  each  applicant  for  a  weather  modification  permit  submit 
with  his  application  a  list  containing  the  name  and  post  office  address  of  each  indi- 
vidual who  will  participate  or  assist  in  the  operation,  and  promptly  report  any 
changes  or  additions  to  this  list  to  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

2.  Reports: 

(a)  Each  individual  and  organization  conducting  weather  modification 
operations  in  Utah  shall  submit  copies  of  the  daily  log  and  supplemental 
information  described  in  Chapter  VIII,  Item  1,  for  each  month,  to  the  Utah 
Division  of  Water  Resources  by  the  last  day  of  each  succeeding  month. 

(b)  Information  copies  of  all  other  reports  required  by  Title  15,  Chapter 
IX,  Sub-Chapter  A,  Part.  908,  Sections  908.5,  908.6,  and  908.7,  Code  of  Fed- 
eral Regulations,  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources 
as  soon  as  practicable,  but  in  no  case  later  than  the  deadlines  set  by  the  Fed- 
eral Regulation. 

(c)  Copies  of  all  reports,  publications,  pamphlets,  and  evaluations  made  by 
either  the  licensed  contractor  or  sponsor  regarding  a  cloud  seeding  project 
must  be  submitted  to  the  Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources  at  the  time  these 
are  made  public. 

(d)  In  relation  to  any  evaluations  made  for  cloud  seeding  effectiveness, 
both  the  method  of  evaluation  and  the  data  used  shall  be  submitted  to  the 
Utah  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

Chapter  IX 

SUSPENSION  OF  CLOUD   SEEDING  OPERATION 

The  policy  in  regard  to  suspension  of  seeding  because  of  potential  flood  danger 
due  to  excessive  snowpack  shall  be  as  follows  : 

1  All  watersheds  in  a  designated  cloud  seeding  target  area  shall  be  monitored 
monthly  by  the  Director  of  the  Division  of  Water  Resources. 

2.  When  it  is  determined  that  any  watershed  in  the  designated  cloud  seeding 
target  area  has  reached  a  critical  maximum  value,  a  thorough  investigation  of 
this  watershed  shall  be  conducted  by  the  Division  of  Water  Resources  to  deter- 
mine if  cloud  seeding  should  be  suspended. 

Washington 


713 


FORM  OF  OKDLK  AND  TRANSMIT!  M.  HY  ACiLNC'Y  IIAVINf.  SlNCl.L  HtAl) 
Stale  of  \\  jshincion 

 DEPARTMENT  OF  ECOLOGY  __ 

(agency  name) 

Administrate  Order  No.    PE  ">">-29  


(ill.    Elmer  C.  Voqel,  djyujJLydi 

the  Department  of  Ecology,  


jo  pnmMiFJic  ...>j  .,j..ni  m    the  Department.  oi-Ecoiflgy^_j,dcey  .  Washington 


repealing  chapter  508-20  KPC  (Weather  Modification  Rules)  and  adopting  chapter 
173-495  (Weather  Modification) .  This  action  is  taken  since  chapter  509-20  KAC 
is  obsolete  it.  form  and  content.  The  new  chapter  is  restructured  in  currently 
approved  format  and  contains  definitive  instructions  lrclonenting  the  intent  of 
chapter  43.37  RCW — Weather  Modification.  Procedures  for  license  and  pormit 
application  are  more  clearly  defined,  exerrpt  activities  are  brought  into  con- 
sonance with  chapter  43.37  FCW,  and  Proof  of  Financial  Responsibility  is  defined. 


(2)  VI  URN  ATI  W  V     I  x<  mil*  1i*r  Adoption  of  I'crnuncnl  Rulrx 

Thix  action  ix  lakes  purxu.ini  lo  Notice  No    7836  I  tied  with  ihe  v.mJc  reviser  on 

J.0/27/77  v,uch 

»hjll  take  elTo.1 

X     ssnajant  lu  RC»"  U  (14  040(2) 

si  j  laicr  dale,  xuch  dale  being   


12)  Al.TKRNATIVK  B.     I  x*  unit  for  Adoption  of  »  nK-r^nci  Rulo 


lind 


an  csscrfcsic]  e»rxts  jnd  ih.ii  the  lurefteng  urdcf  >x  ncccxx..re  lor  the  prtNcn  Hhw  i«i  ihc  public  health 
gcncr.il  »ell.irc  and  Ihji  uthcrvasce  oi  the  rcuuocnicnix  of  not  ice  .md  .ippi.riunii »  lo  prexent  *ic»x  .in 
nropuxvd  aetiua  »ouid  be  oaairarj  to  public  interest  A  kiaicmcai  o>  ihc  facl*  conMiiuitna  >uch  emergency  is 


Such  rulv>  arc  llnrcfure  adufled  ix  cmcrgcnc*  ryk>  lu  Lake  effect  upon  lihn;  mlh  'he  code  rcvixcr 


(1|  Pursu.mi  in  the  rcuuircmcmx  of  RC  VV  U  04        1  1977  e  l<>  §  Jl'  lh.il  "every  apenc)  xhjll  inco'por.uc  it 

miiM  xnccilic  bill  m  n.*  c.ixc  iHhil  .ill  of  Ihe  following  language  ahtffAJIive*  v.  hen  .idoptni£  or  jmcndmj:  rulex*  1 1 ■  1 1 
MMCSSCM  (j).  Ibl  .ir  III  .ix  aflprufWialcl 

X    (a)  Th.x  rule  ix  pr.i.m.le.iicd  purxu.ini  l.i  R(  VV    43  .  37  

and  ix  intended  lu  adimnislr.ilivclt  implement  thai  »i.uuie 

lb)  Thix  rule  ix  promulgated  purxujni  lo  Hi  VV   

which  dircvt'  ih.n  ihc 

latency] 

hax  aulhorii)  lu  mi  pic  men  I  ihc  prmriMua*  of 

(mimic  ..I  Jxl  .ir  RC  W  cl.il.onl 
|C|  Thix  ruk  i»  promulgncd  under  ihe  general  rule  making  .tuihoriti  of  Ihc 


■agency  I 

at  SjMhuh/cd  in  RC  W   


(4)  The  ■MfcliiBWd  hereto  dccl.trc-x  ih.n  he  h..x  complied  »nh  ihe  provix„mx  of  ihc  Open  Public  Meeting*.  A.  i 

(chapter  42..W  RCVVi    i  l,c  AdmmiMralire  ■•ruccilnrc  Act  (chapter   14 114  RCW)  ..r  ihc  Higher  I  iluc.il  

Adminixir.,1, vc  I'roceclurc  Act  (eh.ipur  MH  II  RAW  I.  .ix  appropriate,  .incl  ihc  Male  Rcgixtcr  Ad  leh.ipier  .14  UK 
Kt  V,  | 


(A)  Ihix  order  after  bong  hrxi  recorded  in  ihc  mdef  rcgiMCt  "f  ihix  agci*c\  ix  herewith  transmuted  lo  ihc  Code 
Reviser  fur  bhnf  piirxuant  hi  elwrMer  14  IM  RCW  jnd  xh.ipicr  I   12  WAC 


714 


Chapter  173-495  WAC 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

WAC  173-495-010  Purpose. — The  Department  of  Ecology,  under  the  authority 
vested  in  it  by  Chapter  43.37  RCW,  is  charged  with  responsibilities  for  the  super- 
vision and  control  of  all  weather  modification  activities  within  the  state,  and 
representation  by  the  state  in  all  interstate  contracts  relating  to  weather  modifica- 
tion and  control.  This  regulation  provides  the  basic  framework  for  carrying  out 
the  state's  responsibility  for  such  a  program  through  the  establishment  of  license 
and  permit  requirements  and  procedures,  report  requirements,  and  fee  require- 
ments. The  provisions  of  this  chapter  shall  apply  to  all  weather  modification  ac- 
tivities in  all  parts  of  the  state  except  as  specifically  exempted  in  this  chapter 
and  or  in  chapter  43.37  RCW. 

WAC  173-495-020  Definitions. — As  used  in  these  regulations  unless  the  context 
requires  otherwise: 

( 1 )  "Department"  means  the  Department  of  Ecology. 

( 2  i  '  Operation"  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control 
activities  pursuant  to  a  single  contract  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing 
or  attempting  to  produce  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical 
area  over  one  continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  (1)  year;  or  in  the 
case  of  the  performance  of  weather  modification  and  control  activities,  individu- 
ally or  jointly,  by  a  person  or  persons  to  be  benefited  and  not  undertaken  pur- 
suant to  a  contract,  operation  means  the  performance  of  weather  modification 
and  control  dtttivities  entered  into  for  the  purpose  of  producing,  or  attempting 
to  produce,  a  certain  modifying  effect  within  one  geographical  area  and  one 
continuing  time  interval  not  exceeding  one  (1)  year. 

(3)  "Research  and  Development"  means  theoretical  analysis,  exploration  and 
experimentation,  and  the  extension  of  investigative  findings  of  theories  of  a 
scientific  or  technical  nature  into  practical  application  for  experimental  and 
demonstration  purposes,  including  the  experimental  production  and  testing  of 
models,  devices,  equipment,  materials,  and  processing. 

(4)  "Weather  Modification  and  Control"  means  changing  or  controlling,  or 
attempting  to  change  or  control  by  artificial  methods  the  natural  development 
of  any  or  all  atmospheric  cloud  forms  or  precipitation  forms  which  occur  in  the 
troposphere. 

WAC  178-495-030  Requirement  for  Licenses  and  Permits. — No  person  shall 
engage  in  weather  modification  activities  except  under  and  in  accordance  with 
a  license  and  a  permit  issued  by  the  department,  unless  specifically  exempt  from 
this  requirement  in  WAC  173-495-050. 

WAC  173-495-040  Exempt  Activities — Requirements  of  Those  Exempted. — The 
following  weather  modification  and  control  activity  shall  be  exempt  from  the 
license  requirement  of  RCW  43.37.100.  the  permit  requirements  of  RCW  43.37.100, 
and  the  liability  requirements  of  RCW  43.37.190  : 

(1)  All  research  and  experiments  related  to  weather  modification  control  con- 
ducted within  laboratories. 

(2)  Those  weather  modification  operations  designed  to  alleviate  sudden,  un- 
ezpected,  hazardous  conditions  which  require  expeditious  localized  action  for: 

(a)  protection  against  fire 

(b)  prevention  of  frost 

(c)  dispersal  of  fog 

(3)  Field  research  and  development  by  institutions  of  higher  learning. 

(4)  Any  person  proposing  to  conduct  weather  modification  and  control  activi- 
ties as  described  in  subsection  (2)  above  shall  make  every  reasonable  effort 
prior  thereto  to  notify  the  Department  of  Ecology,  headquarters  offices  in 
Olympia,  Washington,  of  the  type  of  activity  to  be  carried  out.  the  person  carry- 
ing out  the  activity  and  the  materials  and  technique  of  application  to  be  used. 

(5)  Any  person  proposing  to  conduct  weather  modification  and  control  activi- 
ties as  described  in  subsection  (3)  above  shall  provide  a  written  description  of 
the  proposed  program,  notice  of  actual  operations  ten  (10)  days  prior  to  com 
mencement.  and  quarterly  reports  of  operations  and  status  to  the  headquarters 
office  Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia,  Washington. 

WAC  11.', -.',.9.7  0>,~>  Qualifications  for  License — Regular. — All  applicants  for  a 
weather  modification  license  shall  be  certified  professional  members  of  the  Amer- 
ican Meteorological  Society  or  possess  the  academic  achievements  and  profes- 
sional experience  necessary  to  receive  such  certification.  In  cases  where  the 
applicant  is  an  organization,  the  individual  or  individuals  who  will  be  in  control 


715 


and  in  charge  of  the  weather  modification  and  control  activities  shall  be  required 
to  meet  the  above  standard. 

WAC  173-459-050  Qualifications  for  License — Restricted  License. —  (1)  A  re- 
stricted license  may  be  issued  to  an  applicant  for  such  license  when : 

(a)  the  applicant's  proposed  weather  modification  activities  are  limited 
solely  to  those  designed  to  disperse  fog  over  airports ;  and 

(b)  the  applicant  will  be  fully  advised  of  the  pertinent  weather  informa- 
tion by  the  meteorologist  on  duty  during  the  carrying  out  of  the  airport  fog 
dispersal. 

(2)  Applicants  for  restricted  licenses  are  not  required  to  meet  the  qualifica- 
tions otherwise  imposed  by  WAC  173-495-040. 

WAC  173-495-060  Procedures  for  Issuing  License. — 

(1)  Any  person  or  organization  desiring  to  obtain  a  license  or  restricted  li- 
cense shall  make  an  application  to  the  Department  of  Ecology  on  the  form 
prescribed,  listing  name,  business  address,  etc. 

(2)  The  department  may  require  additional  information  of  the  applicant  to 
determine  competency  in  the  field  of  meteorology.  Such  additional  information 
shall  be  requested  of  the  applicant  by  certified  mail,  and  shall  be  submitted  in 
writing. 

(3)  Prior  to  the  issuance  of  any  license,  the  applicant  shall  pay  a  fee  of  $100 
to  the  State  of  Washington. 

(4)  The  application  shall  be  deemed  received  by  the  Department  of  Ecology 
when  received  at  the  headquarters  offices,  Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia, 
Washington  985504. 

WAC  173-495-065  Period  of  License.— 

(1)  Licenses  issued  pursuant  to  chapter  43.37  RCW  and  these  regulations 
shall  be  effective  for  a  period  of  one  (1)  year,  to  terminate  at  the  end  of  the 
calendar  year  of  issuance. 

(2)  No  later  than  thirty  (30)  days  prior  to  the  end  of  the  calendar  year,  the 
licensee  may  request  a  renewal  of  the  license.  The  department  shall  review  said 
license  upon  the  payment  of  a  renewal  fee  of  $100  to  the  State  of  Washington. 

(3)  In  the  determination  of  whether  or  not  to  grant  such  renewal  request, 
the  department  shall  consider,  and  the  applicant  shall  provide,  information  as 
to  whether  the  facts  and  circumstances  relied  on  in  the  issuance  of  the  original 
permit  have  changed  or  altered.  If  the  department  determines  that  the  licensee 
no  longer  meets  the  requirements  of  competency  in  the  field  of  meteorology,  the 
department  may  refuse  to  renew  said  license. 

WAC  173-495-070  Permits  Requirements.— 

(1)  Each  weather  modification  operation  not  specifically  exempted  by  statute 
or  these  regulations  shall  require  a  permit.  A  separate  permit  shall  be  issued  for 
each  operation. 

(2)  A  license  holder  desiring  to  conduct  a  weather  modification  operation  shall 
submit,  an  application  for  a  permit  to  the  Department  of  Ecology. 

(3)  The  permit  applicant  must  hold  a  valid  weather  modification  license  from 
the  State  of  Washington. 

(4)  The  applicant  shall  publish  notice  of  intention  at  least  once  a  week  for 
three  (3)  consecutive  weeks  in  a  legal  newspaper  having  general  circulation 
and  published  within  any  county  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  and 
in  which  the  affected  area  is  located,  or,  if  the  operation  is  to  be  conducted  in 
more  than  one  county  or  if  the  affected  area  is  located  in  more  than  one  county 
or  is  located  in  a  county  other  than  the  one  in  which  the  operation  is  to  be 
conducted,  then  in  a  legal  newspaper  having  a  general  circulation  and  published 
within  each  of  such  counties.  In  case  there  is  no  legal  newspaper  published 
within  the  appropriate  county,  publication  shall  be  made  in  a  legal  newspaper 
having  a  general  circulation  within  the  county. 

(5)  Proof  of  publication  of  the  notice  of  intention,  made  in  the  manner  pro- 
vided herein,  shall  be  filed  by  the  licensee  with  the  department  within  fifteen 
(15)  days  from  the  date  of  last  publication  of  the  notice. 

(6)  The  notice  of  intention  shall  contain  at  least  the  following: 

(a)  the  name  and  address  of  the  licensee ; 

(b)  the  nature  and  object  of  the  intended  operation  and  the  person  or 
organization  on  whose  behalf  it. is  to  be  conducted  ; 

(c)  the  area  in  which  and  the  appropriate  time  during  which  the  opera- 
tion will  be  conducted ; 

(d)  the  area  which  is  intended  to  be  affected  by  the  operation; 

(e)  the  materials  and  methods  to  be  used  in  conducting  the  operation. 

(7)  The  applicant  shall  furnish  proof  of  financial  responsibility,  as  described 
in  WAC  173-495-120  of  this  chapter. 


716 


(8)  The  applicant  shall  pay  a  permit  fee  of  one  and  one-half  percent  (iy2%) 
of  the  estimated  cost  of  the  operation.  The  estimated  cost  will  be  computed  by  the 
department  from  evidence  available  to  it. 

(9)  Prior  to  issuance  of  a  permit  the  department  shall  make  a  determination 
in  writing  that  the  weather  modification  and  control  activities  proposed  to  be 
conducted  under  authority  of  the  permit  have  been  determined  to  be  for  the 
general  welfare  and  public  good. 

(10)  The  department  shall  hold  an  open  public  hearing  at  its  headquarters 
office  in  Olympia  prior  to  any  such  permit  issuance. 

WAC  173-495-080  Permittee's  Report  of  Operations — Requirement. — The 
permittee  shall  be  required  to  maintain  reports  on  all  operations  on  a  daily  basis, 
and  submit  twice  a  month  (1st  day  and  15th  day)  to  the  Department  of  Ecology. 
The  semi-monthly  reports  shall  include  the  following  information  : 

(1)  Number  of  days  under  contract. 

(2)  Number  of  days  of  operation  and  number  of  hours  of  each  day,  for  all 
stations  operated. 

(3 )  The  consumption  rate  and  name  of  seeding  agent  used. 

(4)  A  brief  summary  statement  evaluating  the  past  fifteen  (15) -day  period 
in  regard  to  the  seeding  potential  and  experience. 

(5)  Location  of  operations. 

(6)  Name  and  mailing  address  of  each  individual,  other  than  the  licensee,  par- 
ticipating or  assisting  in  the  operation. 

(7)  A  brief  statement  of  projected  plans  for  the  coming  fifteen  (15) -day 
period. 

(8)  In  the  event  operations  are  unexpectedly  terminated,  a  special  report 
covering  that  fraction  of  the  half-month  period  of  operation  is  required.  All  re- 
ports must  be  post-marked  not  later  than  one  (1)  day  after  due  date. 

(9)  All  such  records  are  public  records  which  shall  be  open  to  public  inspec- 
tion. 

WAC  173-495-100    Revocation,  Suspension,  Modification. — 

(1)  All  permits  authorized  by  RCW  43.37.110  shall  contain  the  following  pro- 
visions :  "The  department  may,  if  it  appears  that  continuing  operation  under 
this  permit  will  cause  immediate  injury  to  persons  or  property,  terminate  or 
otherwise  modify  the  terms  of  this  permit  in  order  to  alleviate  an  emergency 
situation  by  giving  notice  to  the  permittee  by  telegram  or  other  writing." 

(2)  All  permits  authorized  by  RCW  43.37.110  may  be  revoked,  suspended,  or 
modified  when  the  department  has  reason  to  believe  that  good  cause  exists  and 
that  the  revocation,  suspension,  or  modification  is  required  for  the  general  wel- 
fare and  public  good.  Any  such  revocation,  suspension,  or  modification  shall  not 
be  undertaken  prior  to  written  notice  by  certified  mail  to  the  permittee.  Oppor- 
tunity for  comment  by  the  permittee  shall  be  allowed.  Any  final  departmental 
decision  shall  be  in  writing. 

(3)  In  the  event  the  applicant  desires  to  appeal  any  permit  revocation,  modi- 
fication, or  suspension  action  by  the  department  such  appeal  must  be  filed  with 
the  Pollution  Control  Hearings  Board  in  Olympia  within  thirty  (30)  days  of 
the  department's  action.  An  appeal  does  not  constitute  a  stay. 

WAC  173-495-120  Proof  of  Financial  Responsibility. — A  permit  applicant 
shall  furnish  proof  of  financial  responsibility  to  the  Department  of  Ecology  by 
one  of  the  following : 

(1)  Copy  of  insurance  policy  or  binder  for  the  operator. 

(2)  A  current  balance  sheet  showing  sufficient  assets  to  demonstrate  financial 
responsibility. 

(3)  Bond  for  safe  performance. 

(4)  Such  other  information  as  the  applicant  may  provide  the  department,  in 
writing,  if  one  of  the  alternate  methods  (l)-(3).  above,  is  not  feasible  or  avail- 
able, provided  the  applicant  explains  the  infeasibility  or  unavailability. 

The  following  sections  of  WAC  508-20  are  repealed  : 

508-20-020  Board  will  notify  Washington  State  University  and  the  county 
agent  when  permit  is  issued. 

508-20-030  Permittee's  report  of  operations. 
50.8-20-040  Board  may  modify  or  terminate  permits. 
508-20-050  Exempt  activities. 

508-20-060  Exempt  activities— Olympic  Mountains  research  project. 
508-20-070  Qualifications  of  licensees— Restricted  license,  fog  dispersal  at 
airports. 

50^-20-080  Use  of  dry  ice  for  fog  dispersal  over  public  airports. 


Appendix  N 


Documents  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association 

Constitution  and  By-Laws  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association  1 

Article  I.  Name :  The  name  of  the  organization  shall  be  the  Weather  Modifi- 
cation Association. 

Article  II.  Purpose :  The  Association  shall  function  as  a  non-profit  organiza- 
tion. Its  intended  purposes  include,  but  are  not  necessarily  limited  to,  the  follow- 
ing: 

(a)  Promotion. — Promoting  research,  development,  and  understanding  weather 
modification  for  beneficial  uses. 

(b)  Standards  of  Conduct. — Encouraging  and  promoting  the  highest  standards 
of  conduct  including  certification  of  individual  members  qualified  to  execute  field 
experiments  or  operations  in  weather  modification. 

(c)  Information  Center. — Serving  as  a  clearinghouse  and  dissemination  agent 
for  weather  modification  oriented  literature  and  information. 

(d)  Policy  Statements. — Assuming  an  active  role  and  maintaining  a  strong 
voice  in  the  production  and  dissemination  of  policy  statements  concerning  all 
aspects  of  weather  modification  practice. 

Article  III.  Membership:  There  shall  be  four  (4)  classes  of  membership  in  the 
Association.  Each  class  shall  be  afforded  the  privileges  of  membership  as  indi- 
cated. 

(a)  Member. — Any  person  who  subscribes  to  the  statement  of  purposes  of  the 
Association,  upon  payment  of  the  prescribed  annual  dues  (Ref  Article  IV),  shall 
be  afforded  the  privileges  of  membership.  Members  shall  receive  all  publications 
of  the  Association,  and  shall  have  the  right  to  vote  in  the  business  of  the  Asso- 
ciation and  to  hold  any  office  in  the  Association. 

(b)  Student  Member. — Any  person,  engaged  in  a  full-time  program  of  study 
leading  to  a  degree  in  the  atmospheric  sciences,  engineering  or  other  subjects 
related  to  the  science  of  weather  modification,  and  who  subscribes  to  the  state- 
ment of  purpose  of  the  Association,  upon  payment  of  the  prescribed  annual  dues 
(Ref  Article  IV),  shall  be  afforded  the  privileges  of  student  membership.  Student 
members  shall  receive  all  publications  of  the  Association  but  may  not  vote  in  the 
business  of,  nor  hold  office  in,  the  Association. 

(c)  Corporation  Member. — Any  organization  with  active  programs  in  weather 
modification,  or  with  interests  directly  related  to  weather  modification  activities, 
which  subscribes  to  the  statement  of  purposes  of  the  association,  upon  payment 
of  the  prescribed  annual  dues  (Ref  Article  IV),  shall  be  afforded  the  privileges 
of  corporate  membership.  Corporations  members  shall  receive  all  publications 
of  the  Association  and  may  designate  one  (1)  individual  to  act  for  the  corpora- 
tion in  the  affairs  of  the  Association.  The  designated  individual  shall  have  the 
same  rights  and  privileges  afforded  members  of  the  Association. 

(d)  Honorary  Member. — Members,  or  former  members,  of  the  Association  who 
have  made  outstanding  contributions  to  any  aspect  of  weather  modification  may, 
subject  to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Association, 
be  nominated  in  the  Association.  Election  shall  be  by  simple  majority  vote  of  the 
members  present  at  any  regular  or  special  meeting.  Honorary  membership  shall 
be  non-expiring  for  the  life  of  the  member.  Members  so  elected  shall  be  excused 
from  the  payment  of  dues.  They  shall  receive  all  publications  of  the  Association 
and  enjoy  the  same  privileges  as  members  of  the  Association. 

Article  IV.  Dues :  All  dues  for  the  Association  shall  be  paid  on  a  calendar  year 
basis.  Annual  dues  for  the  various  categories  of  membership  shall  be  set  by  vote 
of  the  members  present  at  the  annual  meeting,  on  the  recommendation  of  the 
Executive  Committee  (Ref  Article  VI). 

1  From  the  Journal  of  Weather  Modification,  v.  9,  No.  1,  April  1977,  p.  198-201. 

(717) 


34-857  O  -  79  -  48 


718 


Article  V.  Certification  of  Members:  Certification  of  individual  members  as 
being  qualified  to  execute  field  experiments  or  operations  in  weather  modifica- 
tion shall  be  based  upon  experience,  knowledge,  and  character.  Certification  shall 
be  granted  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  a  Certification  Board  which  shall  be  com- 
posed of  three  (3)  Certified  Members  who  shall  be  appointed  by  the  President. 
The  members  of  the  Certification  Board  shall  each  serve  three  (3)  years  on 
staggered  terms.  Changes  in  procedure  for  certification  of  members  shall  be 
made  only  after  an  affirmative  majority  vote  of  the  Certified  Members  present 
at  any  annual  meeting. 

Article  VI.  Administration :  The  administration  of  the  Association  shall  be 
vested  in  an  Executive  Committee  which  shall  include  the  elected  officers  and 
trustees  of  the  Association  as  follows : 

(a)  President. — The  President  shall  be  responsible  for  the  administration  of 
the  Association.  He  shall  appoint  such  committees  as  he  deems  necessary  for  the 
successful  accomplishment  of  the  Association's  aims.  The  President  shall  preside 
at  all  meetings  and  shall  be  a  member  ex-officio  of  all  committees. 

(b)  President-elect. — The  President-elect  shall  succeed  the  President  in  office. 
The  President-elect  shall  preside  over  the  administrative  functions  of  the  Asso- 
ciation in  the  absence,  or  by  direction,  of  the  President. 

(c)  Secretary. — The  Secretary  shall  be  responsible  for  the  minutes  of  each 
meeting  and  shall  notify  the  membership  of  impending  meetings  (Ref  Article 
VIII).  In  the  absence  of  both  the  President  and  the  President-elect,  the  Secretary 
shall  preside  over  the  administrative  functions  of  the  Association. 

(d)  Treasurer. — The  Treasurer  shall  conduct  the  financial  affairs  of  the  Asso- 
ciation and  keep  accurate  records  thereof.  The  functions  of  Secretary  and  Treas- 
urer may  be  combined  in  one  person  at  the  pleasure  of  the  Executive  Committee. 

(e)  Trustees. — Three  (3)  Trustees,  to  serve  staggered  three-year  terms  shall 
be  elected  from  members  representing  private  groups,  university  groups,  and 
government  groups  respectively.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Trustees  to  represent 
the  interests  of  their  respective  groups  as  members  of  the  Executive  Committee 
and  to  assist  the  President  and  other  elected  officers,  as  may  be  required,  in  the 
administration  of  the  Association. 

The  Executive  Committee  may  employ  such  other  persons  as  may  be  necessary 
for  the  conduct  of  Association  business. 

Article  VII.  Elections:  Elections  shall  be  held  at  the  annual  meeting  (Ref 
Article  VIII).  Officers  to  be  elected  will  include  a  President-elect,  Secretary, 
Treasurer  (Ref  Article  VId),  and  one  (1)  Trustee. 

Nominations  for  elective  offices  shall  be  made  by  a  nominating  committee  ap- 
pointed by  the  President.  Nominations  will  also  be  accepted  from  the  floor,  as 
called  for,  prior  to  balloting. 

New  officers  and  trustees  shall  assume  their  duties  at  the  conclusion  of  the 
annual  meeting,  and  shall  serve  until  their  successors  assume  office. 

Article  VIII.  Meetings :  Meetings  shall  be  held  at  least  once  a  calendar  year. 
The  first  meeting  of  each  calendar  year  shall  be  the  annual  meeting  unless  other- 
wise designated  by  the  Executive  Committee.  Advance  notice  of  all  meetings 
shall  be  mailed  by  the  Secretary  (Ref  Article  Vic)  to  all  members  at  least 
thirty  (30)  days  prior  to  the  date  of  the  meeting. 

The  presiding  officer  and  ten  (10)  percent  of  the  voting  members  shall  con- 
stitute a  quorum.  The  location  and  date  of  all  meetings  shall  be  determined  by  a 
majority  vote  of  the  Executive  Committee. 

Article  IX.  Amendments :  This  Constitution  and  By-laws  may  be  amended  at 
any  meeting  by  a  majority  vote  representing  a  combination  of  all  members  present 
plus  any  absentee  ballots  received  up  to  the  day  of  the  balloting  on  the  floor, 
providing  that  the  total  votes  cast  constitute  a  quorum  as  defined  in  Article  VIII. 
All  amendments  must  be  submitted  to  the  membership  at  least  thirty  (30)  days 
prior  to  the  meeting  at  which  they  are  to  be  considered. 

Qualifications  and  Procedures  for  Certification  by  the  Weather 
Modification  Association  2 

purpose  of  certification 

One  of  the  purposes  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association  is  to  certify  indi- 
vidual  members  qualified  to  direct  field  experiments  or  operations  in  weather 
modification.  This  certification  is  considered  desirable  to  accomplish  other  pur- 


2  From  the  "Journal  of  Weather  Modification,"  v.  9,  No.  1,  April  1977,  p.  202-204. 


719 


poses  of  the  Association,  namely,  promoting  research  and  engineering  advance- 
ments, encouraging  and  promoting  the  highest  standards  for  professional  conduct, 
and  assisting  in  arranging  liability  insurance  upon  application  from  members 
performing  field  operations  or  experiments. 

This  document  gives  the  qualifications  and  procedures  for  such  certification 
by  the  Weather  Modification  Association. 

QUALIFICATION   FOR  CERTIFICATION 

Certification  of  individuals  to  direct  weather  modification  field  experiments  or 
operations  shall  be  based  on  character,  knowledge,  and  experience.  Certification 
shall  be  made  at  the  discretion  of  the  Board,  but  the  following  shall  be  considered 
minimum  requirements : 

General :  A  minimum  of  two  years'  field  experience  at  the  professional  level  in 
directing  weather  modification  operations  or  research  shall  be  required  of  all 
applicants,  in  addition  to  the  experience  and  educational  requirements  specified 
below : 

Category  A. — Eight  (8)  years'  experience  in  weather  modification  field 
operations  or  research. 

Category  B. — A  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics,  or  the  physical  sciences 
plus  two  years'  experience  in  weather  modification  field  operations  or  research. 

Category  C. — A  degree  in  meteorology,  or  a  degree  in  engineering,  mathematics, 
or  the  physical  sciences  which  includes  or  is  in  addition  to  at  least  25  semester 
hours  of  meteorological  course  work. 

Weather  modification  field  operations  experience  is  defined  to  be  that  which 
is  involved  in  the  organization,  development,  and  actual  conduct  of  field  proj- 
ects designed  to  effect  a  change  in  the  weather.  Actual  manipulation  to  produce 
a  desired  change  is  implied.  In  all  cases,  actual  field  experience  is  required  to 
insure  the  qualifications  of  the  person  certified.  Operations  may  be  either  com- 
mercial or  research,  but  field  operations  of  either  type  are  required.  "Professional 
level"  indicates  a  level  of  responsibility  for  direct  supervision  and  conduct  of 
the  field  operations  or  substantial  parts  thereof. 

COMPOSITION  AND   TERMS   OF   OFFICE   OF   CERTIFICATION  BOARD 

The  initial  Certification  Board  and  the  procedure  by  which  the  initial  certifica- 
tion procedures  are  to  be  adopted  are  given  in  motions  passed  by  the  Weather 
Modification  Association  at  their  March  1967  meeting.  The  motions  read  as 
follows : 

Motion  Xo.  1. — That  the  initial  certification  committee  as  specified  in  Article  V 
of  the  Constitution  and  Bylaws  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association  be  com- 
posed of  three  (3)  Executive  Officers  of  the  W.C.R.A. 

Motion  Xo.  2. — That  the  initial  certification  committee  establish  the  qualifica- 
tions and  procedures  to  be  followed  for  certification,  and  present  same  by  mail 
for  approval  to  all  past  officers  of  W.C.R.A.  who  are  current  members  of  the 
organization. 

Affirmative  majority  vote  by  those  replying  from  this  group  shall  constitute 
approval  of  the  procedures  so  specified.  Subsequent  changes  in  these  procedures 
shall  be  made  only  after  affirmative  majority  vote  of  the  certified  members  present 
at  any  annual  meeting. 

The  initial  Certification  Committee  established  by  the  March  1967  meeting  of 
the  WMA  shall  function  for  calendar  year  1968.  The  length  of  terms  of  office 
of  the  initial  certification  board  shal  be  determined  by  lot  to  be  staggered  to 
permit  the  appointment  of  one  new  member  in  each  year  beginning  1969.  At  the 
end  of  calendar  year  1968.  the  President  shall  appoint  one  new  member  of  the 
Certification  Board.  In  subsequent  years,  a  new  member  of  the  Certification 
Board  shall  be  appointed  by  the  President  each  year.  As  specified  in  Article  V 
of  the  Constitution  and  Bylaws  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association,  members 
of  the  Certification  Board  shall  each  serve  three  years  on  staggered  terms.  The 
member  of  the  Certification  Board  who  has  the  longest  tenure  on  the  Board  shall 
serve  as  chairman. 

PROCEDURE  AND  FEES  FOR  CERTIFICATION 

Persons  desiring  certification  as  individuals  qualified  for  conducting  field 
experiments  or  operations  in  weather  modification  shall  write  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  Weather  Modification  Association  requesting  an  application  form  and  in- 


720 


structions.  The  completed  application  form  shall  be  returned  to  the  Secretary  and 
must  be  accompanied  by  a  $25  check  made  payable  to  the  Weather  Modifica- 
tion Association.  This  fee  will  be  retained  by  the  Weather  Modification  Associa- 
tion whether  the  application  is  accepted  or  denied. 

The  Certification  Board  shall  review  the  application  form  and  from  the  infor- 
mation contained  therein  and  any  other  information  it  obtains,  will  determine 
whether  the  applicant  has  satisfied  the  requirements  for  qualification  for  certi- 
fication. The  Certification  Board  may  request  additional  information  from  the 
applicant  prior  to  making  a  final  decision  as  to  whether  or  not  the  applicant 
meets  the  criteria  for  certification. 

After  review  of  the  application,  the  Chairman  of  the  Certification  Board  shall 
notify  the  applicant  of  the  decision  of  the  Board.  If  the  application  is  approved, 
the  Chairman  of  the  Certification  Board  shall  give  the  applicant  a  certificate  to 
verify  that  the  individual  has  met  the  qualification  for  certification. 

Unsuccessful  applicants  may  reapply  for  certification  not  earlier  than  one  cal- 
endar year  after  notification  of  disapproval.  Each  subsequent  application  for  cer- 
tification shall  be  accompanied  by  a  payment  of  the  $25  fee. 


PERIOD  OF  CERTIFICATION  AND  RENEWAL 


Certification  of  a  member  shall  be  effective  for  a  period  of  three  years  from  the 
date  of  issuance.  Application  for  renewal  of  certification  shall  be  submitted  prior 
to  expiration  date  in  writing  and  accompanied  by  a  fee  of  $5.  Issuance  of  a 
renewal  of  certification  shall  be  automatic  upon  certification  by  the  Board  that 
no  notification  of  violation  of  the  conditions  of  the  original  certification  has  been 
received.  In  the  event  such  notice  has  been  received,  renewal  will  be  granted  if 
recommended  by  the  Board.  If  the  Board  does  not  recommend  renewal,  the  case 
will  be  presented  for  the  consideration  of  the  certified  members  at  two  consecu- 
tive meetings.  Renewal  shall  be  denied  only  if  two-thirds  of  the  certified  mem- 
bers in  attendance  at  the  second  meeting  indicate  by  secret  written  ballot  that 
renewal  shall  be  denied.  The  $5  fee  will  be  retained  whether  renewal  is  granted  or 
not. 

Weather  Modification  Association 

Proposed  Draft  Statement  on  Standards  and  Ethics  for  Weather  Modification 
Operators3  Prepared  by  Committee  on  Standards  and  Ethics,  September  1977 


PURPOSE 


The  Weather  Modification  Association  (WMA)  has  adopted  this  statement 
on  ethics  and  standards  in  order  to  further  the  Association's  purposes,  which 
inc  lude  but  are  not  limited  to  : 

1.  Promoting  research,  development  and  understanding  of  weather  modification 
for  beneficial  uses. 

2.  Encouraging  and  promoting  the  highest  standards  of  conduct. 


CODE  OF  ETHICS 

WMA  members  are  expected  to  comply  with  the  following  code  of  ethics  which 
cover  their  relationships  with  the  general  public,  their  clients,  and  the  meteoro- 
logical profession. 

Relationships  with  general  public 

1.  The  member  will  comply  with  all  laws  and  regulations  of  the  federal,  state, 
and  local  k'ovornmental  units,  particularly  those  laws  and  regulations  covering 
weather  modification  activities. 

2.  The  member  will  not  participate  in  activities  detrimental  to  the  general 
public  interest  or  which  inflict  undue  hardship  upon  individuals  in  proposed 
operational  areas. 


i  !  rAlsttr,,hnt^  &  members  of  the  Weather  Modification  Association  at  the  1977  fall  meet- 
liit:.  October  10.  1977.  Champaign,  Illinois,  for  review  and  comment. 


721 


Relationships  with  clients 

3  The  member  will  not  exaggerate  his  (her)  capabilities,  nor  guarantee  results 
in  terms  of  future  weather  conditions.  Statements  regarding  the  probable  effects 
of  weather  modification  projects  should  be  compatible  with  the  current  State- 
ment of  Capabilities"  set  forth  by  the  WMA,  unless  they  can  be  justified  on  the 
basis  of  documented  results.  ^    »  ^ 

4  Contracts  where  a  bonus  is  paid  for  "production  of  rainfall  over  and  abo\e 
some  arbitrary  amount,  such  as  a  monthly  normal,  are  detrimental  to  the  devel- 
opment of  a  sound  technology,  and  are  to  be  discouraged.  ^ 

5  The  member  will  divulge  fully  to  clients  and  potential  clients  all  chemicals 
and  methods  used.  Proprietary  rights  to  newly  developed  materials  or  tech- 
niques for  cloud  seeding  may  be  established  through  the  obtaining  of  patents. 

Relationships  with  meteorological  profession 

6.  The  member  will  conduct  himself  (herself)  in  a  manner  to  reflect  dignity  and 
honor  on  the  profession. 

7.  The  member  will  keep  abreast  of  scientific  and  technical  developments  in  the 
field  of  weather  modification  and  will  seek  to  incorporate  improvements  into  his 
(her)  operational  and  research  programs. 

8.  The  member  will  endeavor  to  contribute  new  knowledge  to  the  profession  by 
making  known  significant  results  from  operational  and  research  programs. 

9.  The  member  will  not  knowingly  take  credit  for  work  done  by  others,  but  will 
attempt  to  give  credit  where  due. 

10.  The  member  will  not  unjustly  criticize  fellow  workers  in  his  (her)  profes- 
sion, but  will  refer  to  the  Association  information  on  apparent  unethical  prac- 
tices on  the  part  of  other  operators. 

STANDARDS  FOR  CONDUCT  OF  INDIVIDUAL  PROJECTS 

The  following  standards  shall  apply  to  the  conduct  of  both  operational  and 
research  projects : 

1.  Each  project  should  have  a  set  of  clearly  defined  objectives.  The  operator 
should  provide  as  precise  a  statement  as  possible  of  how  the  objectives  are  to  be 
reached. 

2.  The  operator  will  not  undertake  work  in  an  area  where  serious  conflicts  might 
arise  from  weather  modification  activities,  without  taking  steps  to  identify  and 
correct  such  situations  in  advance. 

3.  The  operator  will  conduct  each  project  in  such  a  way  as  to  minimize  danger 
to  the  public  and  to  the  environment  from  the  use  of  seeding  devices,  seeding 
agents,  and  other  appurtenances  of  his  (her)  trade. 

4.  Each  project  should  be  under  the  personal  direction  of  a  meteorologist  with 
special  training  or  experience  in  weather  modification  field  projects. 

5.  The  project  meteorologist  should  have  access  to  up-to-date  weather  data 
including,  as  a  minimum,  the  weather  data  available  through  circuits  of  the 
National  Weather  Service.  Local  atmospheric  soundings,  wind  observations,  radar 
data,  and  telemetered  precipitation  data  from  remote  sites  are  highly  desirable 
supplements. 

6.  Each  proect  should  have  established  criteria  and  procedures  for  shutting 
down  operations  in  the  face  of  impending  severe  weather  to  avoid  contributing 
to,  or  appearing  to  contribute  to,  damaging  weather  situations.  The  shutdown  cri- 
teria and  procedures  should  be  specified  in  advance  in  writing,  and  should  take 
into  account  existing  water  management  practices  and  flood  control  facilities. 

7.  A  calibration  curve  showing  ice  nuclei  output  should  be  available  for  each 
type  of  cloud  seeding  generator  used  on  a  project. 

8.  Evaluations  of  projects  are  strongly  encouraged,  but  limitations  imposed 
by  project  duration,  inadequacy  of  observations,  and  so  on,  should  be  pointed 
out. 


Appendix  O 


policy  statement  ol  me  American  Meteorological 
society  on  purpose!  and  inadvertent  modification 
ol  weather  and  climate 

As  adopted  by  the  Council  on  January  28,  1973 


Introduction 

Man's  ability  to  alter  certain  local  weather  conditions, 
either  purposefully  or  inadvertently,  in  some  areas  is 
clearly  established.  However,  most  atmospheric  scientists 
agree  that  man's  ability  to  significantly  alter  the  atmo- 
spheric environment  in  a  purposeful  manner  is  still  in 
the  early  stages  of  development.  Adequate  research  and 
operational  support  in  the  1970s  should  permit  major 
advances  in  developing  weather  modification  techniques 
in  the  next  decade. 

A  new  statement  by  the  American  Meteorological 
Society  (AMS)  to  inform  the  public  and  to  answer  sci- 
entific questions  about  weather  and  climate  modification 
is  therefore  timely,  and  also  useful  in  setting  national 
scientific  priorities.  Specifically,  four  conditions  have 
been  significantly  altered  since  the  last  AMS  statement, 
issued  in  1967,  and  the  changes  which  have  dictated  this 
new  statement  include:  1)  advances  in  knowledge  and 
techniques  of  planned  weather  modification,  2)  new 
evidence  of  urban-related  inadvertent  weather  or  climate 
modification,  3)  a  growing  need  to  assess  the  partially  de- 
veloped and  rapidly  evolving  weather  modification  tech- 
nology in  light  of  public  interest  and  concerns,  and  4)  a 
need  to  issue  recommendations  regarding  essential  future 
weather  modification  efforts. 

Status  of  planned  weather  modification 

As  we  move  into  the  1970s  there  is  mounting  scientific 
evidence  that  cloud  seeding  using  ice  nuclei  can  produce 
substantial,  albeit  local,  changes  in  clouds  and  storm 
systems.  Definitive  success  in  dispersing  fog  and  in  in- 
creasing rainfall  and  snowfall  has  been  achieved  in  the 
United  States  and  elsewhere  in  the  1960s. 

Fog.  Dissipation  of  cold  (supercooled)  fogs  and  low 
stratus  is  established  as  an  operational  application  with 
clear  economic  benefits.  Warm  fog  dissipation  can  gen- 
erally be  accomplished  by  expensive  techniques,  but  a 
reliable  and  economically  acceptable  technique  for  dissi- 
pating warm  fogs  on  a  local  scale  is  not  established. 

Precipitation.  Precipitation  amounts  from  certain  cold 
orographic  clouds  in  winter  can  apparently  be  substan- 
tially increased  or  decreased  on  a  predictable  basis,  and 
thus  seeding  of  these  types  of  clouds  for  economic  benefit 
appears  to  be  justified.  Seeding  of  cold  orographic  clouds 
sometimes  increases,  sometimes  decreases,  and  sometimes 
has  no  effect  on  precipitation  depending  on  the  mete- 


orological conditions.  Overall  increases  from  5  to  prob- 
ably 30%,  depending  on  location,  seem  reasonable  with 
existing  technology  for  certain  mountainous  areas  of 
the  western  United  States.  Attempts  to  increase  pre- 
cipitation from  convective  clouds  have  provided  local  in- 
creases under  certain  circumstances,  and  under  other 
circumstances  local  decreases.  Too  little  is  known  about 
the  physical,  chemical,  and  dynamical  processes  of  con- 
vective precipitation  to  make  the  outcome  predictable  in 
most  areas.  Precipitation  increases  from  non-orographic 
and  non-convective  cloud  systems,  such  as  the  shallow 
stratiform  winter  storms  of  the  central  United  States, 
have  not  been  demonstrated;  but  in  theory,  at  least,  it 
is  possible  to  increase  or  relocate  precipitation  from  such 
systems.  There  is  also  some  evidence  that  precipitation 
alterations  may  occur  100  kilometers  or  more  beyond  the 
primary  seeded  areas,  but  much  more  proof  and  a  better 
understanding  of  these  "downwind  effects'*  are  needed. 

Severe  Storms.  Results  from  efforts  to  mitigate  the  de- 
struction of  severe  storms  can  be  classed  as  encouraging 
but  still  indeterminate.  Positive  but  unsubstantiated 
claims  and  growing  optimism  best  describe  results  from 
lightning  suppression  efforts  in  the  United  States,  recent 
hail  suppression  programs  in  the  United  States  and 
abroad,  and  hurricane  modification  efforts  in  the  At- 
lantic. Less  optimism  surrounds  the  possibilities  of  in- 
hibiting tornadoes  and  severe  local  rainstorms.  Too  little 
controlled  experimentation  concerning  modification  of 
severe  storms  has  been  conducted  to  provide  sufficient 
credible  evidence  of  success.  Recent  evidence,  particu- 
larly that  from  the  Soviet  Union  and  Europe,  of  hail 
suppression  appears  to  make  it  more  credible  than  the 
evidence  for  the  control  of  other  forms  of  severe  storms. 

Inadvertent  weather  modification 

There  is  growing  worldwide  concern  over  man's  inad- 
vertent modification  of  weather  and  climate.  Urban- 
industrial  pollutants  (thermal,  gaseous,  and  particulate 
emissions)  have  been  shown  to  alter  urban  weather  and 
climate,  and  new  evidence  establishes  that  alterations 
occur  in  clouds  and  precipitation  from  8  to  80  kilometers 
downwind  of  urban-industrial  sources.  Recent  investiga- 
tions of  major  shifts  in  land  use  practices,  such  as  irriga- 
tion and  different  cropping,  have  pointed  to  possible 
alterations  in  weather  and  climate  over  substantial 
regions. 


1  Reprinted  from  the  Bulletin  of  the  American  Meteorological  Society,  v.  54,  No.  7,  July 
1078,  pp.  094-695. 


(722) 


723 


Man's  effect  on  global  climate  is  suspected,  since  his 
activities  have  resulted  in  regional  changes  in  the  cloud 
cover  and  surface  albedo,  and  widespread  increases  in 
COt  concentration  and  particulate  concentration.  How- 
ever, there  is  no  clear  evidence  yet  that  these  changes 
have  accounted  for  any  substantial  part  of  the  climatic 
fluctuations  of  the  past  century. 

Public  issues 

Recent  advances  towards  achieving  planned  "weather 
management."  and  an  awareness  of  the  reality  of  inad- 
vertent weather  modification,  make  it  imperative  that  a 
great  deal  more  be  understood  about  their  social,  ecologi- 
cal, and  legal  implications.  Limited  economic  and  eco- 
logical studies  of  the  potential  effects  of  planned  weather 
modification  have  produced  conflicting  results  that  point 
to  the  need  for  comprehensive  socioeconomic  studies. 
Before  planned  weather  modification  becomes  a  widely 
applied  technology,  comprehensive  analyses  of  the  over- 
all public  interests  on  a  local,  regional,  national,  and 
international  scale  must  be  made  in  order  to  achieve 
rational  judgments  and  decisions  concerning  the  wise  use 
of  weather  modification. 

Recommendations 

Significant  progress  in  weather  modification  has  occurred 
in  recent  years.  It  has  been  demonstrated  that  man  can 
and  does  modify  the  weather.  However,  we  still  have 
much  to  learn  about  the  following  subjects:  1)  the  exact 
atmospheric  conditions  in  which  it  is  possible  to  in- 
crease, decrease  or  relocate  precipitation;  2)  those  tech- 
niques that  might  reduce  the  damage  caused  by  severe 
storms;  or  3)  the  extent  of  climatic  change  being  pro- 
duced inadvertently  by  man.  These  three  items  should  be 
included  among  the  major  goals  of  our  national  pro- 
gram in  weather  modification,  and  more  unified  and 
stronger  federal  programs  must  be  developed  to  meet 
the  demands  created  by  a  society  which  is  increasing 
in  size  and  complexity. 

Some  specific  recommendations  regarding  weather 
modification  activities  in  the  1970s  include: 

1)  development  of  improved  numerical  models  of  con- 
vective  clouds  and  storm  systems  relevant  to  weather 
modification  efforts; 

2)  performance  of  comprehensive,  randomized  experi- 
ments involving  precipitation  enhancement  and  re- 
distribution in  each  of  the  major  climatic  zones  of  the 
United  States  in  each  season  and  for  each  of  the  prin- 
cipal forms  of  precipitation,  with  provisions  for  evalua- 
tions of  downwind  effects; 

3)  pursuance  of  fundamental  research  and  field  ex- 
periments to  ascertain  means  of  mitigating  severe  storms 
(thunderstorms,  hail,  hurricanes,  and  tornadoes); 

4)  extended  research  on  operational  warm  fog  dis- 
persion; 

5)  creation  and  expansion  of  facilities  and  expertise 
devoted  to  this  subject,  including  application  of  current 


satellite  programs,  cloud  physics  research  laboratories, 
laboratories  for  developing  seeding  devices  and  seeding 
agents,  instrumented  vehicles  for  penetrating  severe 
storms,  and  statistical  research  groups;  and 

6)  encouragement  of  programs  to  study  inadvertent 
weather  modification  (a)  by  monitoring  conditions 
critical  to  the  global  climate  and  man's  well-being,  in- 
cluding pollutants,  water  vapor,  cloud  cover,  surface 
albedo,  and  heat  balance,  and  (b)  by  measuring  and 
defining  the  influences  of  urban  development  and  land- 
use  change  on  weather  and  climate. 

For  additional  information 

A  few  of  many  possible  references  were  selected  for  this 
list  describing  the  progress  in  all  phases  of  weather  and 
climate  modification  in  recent  years.  Inclusion  of  a  refer- 
ence does  not  necessarily  imply  our  sanction  of  the 
views  or  findings,  but  indicates  it  is  a  source  of  addi- 
tional information  for  the  interested  reader. 

American  Meteorological  Society,  45  Beacon  Street,  Bos- 
ton, Massachusetts  02108,  1971:  Proceedings  of  Inter- 
national Conference  on  Weather  Modification.  Can- 
berra, Australia,  372  pp. 

American  Meteorological  Society,  45  Beacon  Street,  Bos- 
ton, Massachusetts  02108,  1972:  Preprints  of  Third 
Conference  on  Weather  Modification.  Rapid  City, 
S.  Dak,  336  pp. 

National  Academy  of  Sciences,  Printing  and  Publishing 
Office,  2101  Constitution  Avenue,  Washington,  D.C. 
20418,  1971:  The  Atmospheric  Sciences  and  Man's 
Needs:  Priorities  for  Future.  Washington,  D.C,  88  pp. 

National  Academy  of  Sciences.  Printing  and  Publish- 
ing Office,  2101  Constitution  Avenue,  Washington, 
D.C.  20418  (to  be  published):  Weather  and  Climate 
Modification,  National  Policies  and  Programs.  Wash- 
ington, D.C,  417  pp. 

Colorado  Associated  University  Press,  University  of 
Colorado,  1424  15th  Street,  Boulder,  Colorado  80302, 
1967:  Man  and  the  Quality  of  his  Environment: 
Western  Resources  Conference,  edited  by  J.  E.  Flack 
and  M.  C.  Shipley.  Boulder,  Colo.,  251  pp. 

Lambright,  W.  H.:  Government  and  technological  in- 
novation: Weather  modification  as  a  case  in  point. 
Public  Administration  Review,  1,  1-10.  1972:  Ameri- 
can Society  for  Public  Administration,  1225  Connecti- 
cut Avenue,  NW,  Washington.  D.C.  20036. 

Lackner,  J.  D.:  Precipitation  Modification.  National 
Water  Commission  Report  NWC-EES-7 1-005.  1971: 
National  Water  Commission,  Room  405,  800  North 
Quincy,  Arlington,  Virginia  22203,  170  pp. 

M.I.T.  Press,  28  Carleton  Street.  Cambridge,  Mass.  02142. 
1971:  Study  of  Man's  Impact  on  the  Climate  (SMIC 
Report),  302  pp. 

World  Meteorological  Organization,  Case  Postale  No. 
1,  CH-1211  Geneva  20,  Switzerland,  1971:  Present  state 
of  knowledge  and  possible  practical  benefits  in  some 
fields  of  weather  modification.  General  Summary  of 
EC-XXII,  Document  38,  3  pp. 


Appendix  P 


Reporting  Agencies  of  Member  Countries  and  Questionnaire  Cir- 
culated To  Receive  Weather  Modification  Information  From 
Members  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organization 

Reporting  Agencies 

ARGENTINA  Comiei6n  Naoional  de  Investigaciones  Eapaciales 

Fuerza  Aerea  Argentina 
1104  -  Comodoro  Pedro  ZannJ  250 
Buenos  Aires 


BRAZIL 


Instituto  de  Atividades  Espaciais 
Divisao  de  Ciencias  Atmosf Ericas 
CTA/IAE 

12000  -  Sao  Jose  dos  Campos,  SP 


BULGARIA 


Hydrometeorological  Service 

Boulevard  Lenin  66 

Sofia 


CANADA  Cloud  Physics  Research  Division 

Atmospheric  Environment  Service 
4905  Bufferin  Street 
Dovnsview,  Ontario  ^K3H  5^4 

CUBA  Somite  de  Programe  Lluvia  Provocada 

Academia  de  Ciencias  de  Cuba 
ININTEF,    Calle  0  LTo.  8 
Havana  4 


CZECHOSLOVAKIA  Hydrometeoro logical  Institute 

Jesnioval7 
885  32-Koliba 

FED.  REP.  OF  GERMANY       Ber  Landrat  des  iandkreises  Rosenheim 

Landratsamt 
82  Rosenheim/Obb. 


HUNGARY 


Meteorological  Service  of  the  Hungarian  People' 

Republic 
Post  Offioe  Box  38 
H-1525  Budapest 


ISRAEL 


ITALY 


EMS  subsd  y  "Mekorot" 
"Mekorot"  Water  Co. 
Post  Offioe  Box  308 
Union 

Societa  Rioerche  Esperienze  Meteorologiche 

Via  Pasubio  11 

Rome 


MALAYSIA 


Malaysian  Meteorological  Service 
Jalan  Sultan 
Petaling  Jaya 
Selangor 


(724) 


725 


MEXICO 


NICAIiAGUA 


NIGER 


IIORVJAY 


Philippines 


ROMANIA 


SPAIN 


SWITZERLAND 


THAILAND 


TURKEY 


U.S.A. 


UPPER  VOLT  A 


YUGOSLAVIA 


Dcpartanento  de  IIidrometeorolo£ia  y  Prediccion 
Direccion  de  Hidrolo^ia. 
Versallus  Vj ,  4    pi  so 
Mexico  6  D.F. 

Conision  Nacional  del  Algodon 

Seccion  de  Investi^aciones  Climctolo£;icas 

Apartado  Postal  ITo.  .^655 

Managua 

Direction  de  la  Metc'orolo^ie  Ilationale 

Bortc  Po  stale  ITo.  iilCJ 

iTianey 

Dirrctorato  of  Civil  Aviation 
Store*.  101)  Dcp 
Oslo  1 

Philippine  Atmospheric,  Geophysical  ar:d 

Astrononical  Services  Administration  (i'AGASA) 
Typhoon  Moderation  Research  and  Development  Office 
14 "'4  Quezon  Avenue 
Quezon  City 

Institut  de  mete  orologie  et  d'hydrologie 
Sos.  Bucuresti-Ploiesti  No.  97 
Sector  1 
Bucarest  18 

Servicio  Meteorolo/jico  Nacional 
Ciudad  Universitaria 
Apartado  235 
Madrid 

Laboratory  for  Atmospheric  Physics 
Federal  Institute  of  Technology 
H.P.P.  HSnggerberg 
G095  Zurich 

The  Royal  Rain  Making  Research  and  Development 
Institute 

(no  address  given) 


Turkish  State  Meteorological  Service 

Post  Office  Box  Ho.  401 

Ankara 

Environmental  Modification  Office  (EMS) 
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
6010  Executive  Boulevard 
Rockville,  Maryland  20852 

Direction  de  la  Meteorologie  Nationale 

Boite  Postale  No.  576 

Ouagadougou 

Federal  Hydrometeorological  Institute 

Bir&aninova  6 

Post  Office  Box  604 

11000  Belgrade 


726 


Copy  of  Questionnaire  Circulated  to  Receive  Information  From  Members 

Member  of  WMO  :  

Reporting  of  activities  in  the  year  19__. 

1.  Type  (purpose)  of  weather  modification  activity  or  project : 

2.  Approximate  size  of  the  project  area  overall :  km2. 

and  of  the  target  area  :  km2. 

3.  Name  and/or  reference  of  project : 

4.  Location  of  area  in  which  project  is  carried  out : 

5.  Year  project  commenced  :  19__. 

6.  Is  it  expected  to  continue  during  the  coming  year? 

Yes   No   iNot  known  

7.  Nature  of  national  organization  sponsoring  project : 

Please  place  X. 

Governmental  Private 

Agriculture      

Energy      

Forestry  ^      

Hydrology       

Transportation      

Other  (please  specify)      

8.  Description  of  weather  modification  apparatus,  modification  agents  and  their 
dispersal  rates,  the  techniques  employed,  etc.  (see  instructions) . 

9.  Months  of  current  reporting  year  during  which  seeding  or  other  weather 
modification  activity  took  place : 

10.  Number  of  days  during  the  year  on  which  seeding  (or  other  weather  modi- 
fication activity)  took  place: 

11.  Was  a  document  prepared  on  the  possible  effects  on  the  environment  of  the 
weather  modification  project? 

Yes  

No  

12.  Optional  remarks : 

13.  Reporting  agency  : 

(a)  Name  of  reporting  agency  : 

(b)  Official  title  of  responsible  office  : 

(c)  Postal  address : 
Signed : 
Date: 

Please  complete  and  return  this  questionnaire  as  soon  as  possible,  and  in  any 
case  not  later  than  15  March  1977,  to : 
The  Secretary-General 
World  Meteorological  Organization 
Case  Postale  No.  5 
CH-1211  GENEVA  20 

Notes  for  Completing  Report  on  Weather  Modification  Activities 

weather  modification  activities  which  should  be  included  in  the  register 

(1)  The  seeding  or  dispersing  into  clouds  or  fog  of  any  substance  with  the 
object  of  altering  drop-size  distribution,  producing  ice  crystals  or  the  coagulation 
of  droplets,  altering  the  development  of  hail  or  lightning,  or  influencing  in  any 
way  the  natural  development  cycle  of  clouds  or  their  environment ; 

(2)  The  use  of  fires  or  heat  sources  to  influence  convective  circulation  or  to 
evaporate  fog ; 

(3)  The  modification  of  the  solar  radiation  exchange  of  the  earth  or  clouds, 
through  the  release  of  gases,  dusts,  liquids  or  aerosols  into  the  atmosphere; 

(4)  The  modification  of  the  characteristics  of  land  or  water  surfaces  by  dust- 
ing or  treating  with  powders,  liquid  sprays,  dyes,  or  other  materials; 

(5)  The  releasing  of  electrically  charged  or  radioactive  particles,  or  ions,  into 
the  atmosphere ; 

(6)  The  application  of  shock  waves,  sonic  energy  sources,  or  other  explosive 
or  acoustic  sources  to  the  atmosphere  ; 


727 


(7)  The  use  of  aircraft  and  helicopters  to  produce  downwash  for  fog  dispersal 
as  well  as  the  use  of  jet  engines  and  other  sources  of  artificial  wind  generation ; 

(8)  The  use  of  lasers  or  other  sources  of  electromagnetic  radiation  ; 

(9)  Any  other  similar  activities  falling  within  the  definition  of  weather 
modification. 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION  ACTIVITIES  WHICH  NEED  NOT  BE  INCLUDED  IN  THE  REGISTER 

Activities  of  a  purely  local  nature,  such  as  the  use  of  lightning  deflection  or 
static  discharge  devices  in  aircraft,  boats,  or  buildings,  or  the  use  of  small  heat 
sources,  fans,  fogging  devices,  aircraft  downwash,  or  sprays  to  prevent  the  oc- 
currence of  frost  in  tracts  or  fields  planted  with  crops  susceptible  to  frost  or 
freeze  damage. 

Completing  the  form 

One  completed  copy  of  this  form  is  requested  for  each  weather  modification 
activity  (hereafter  referred  to  as  the  project)  once  per  year. 

Item  1 — Enter  the  purpose  of  the  project  or  activity :  e.g.  rainfall  increase, 
hail  suppression,  cold  fog  dispersal,  etc. 

Item  2 — Enter  the  size  (in  km2)  of  the  area  designated  for  the  project,  and 
the  size  of  the  target  area  if  different  (see  "Definition",  item  4) . 

Item  3 — Enter  the  name  and/or  reference  of  project  used  by  the  operator.  If 
the  project  was  reported  in  the  previous  Register,  please  quote  the  WMO  Regis- 
ter Number  which  appears  in  column  1. 

Item  4 — Indicate  the  location  of  the  weather  modification  project  by  geographi- 
cal co-ordinates  and  name  of  the  region. 

Item  5 — Enter  the  year  in  which  the  first  activities  under  the  present  project 
took  place. 

Item  6 — Indicate  whether  the  project  is  expected  to  continue  in  the  future. 

Item  7 — Indicate  the  nature  of  the  organization  sponsoring  the  project  and 
whether  it  is  governmental  (including  local  governments)  or  private. 

Item  8 — Describe  the  weather  modification  apparatus,  modification  agents  and 
the  techniques  used.  This  might  include  type  of  ground  or  airborne  apparatus 
used,  type  of  modification  material  dispersed,  rate  of  dispersal  in  grams  per  hour 
or  other  appropriate  descriptions,  and  other  information  such  as  type  of  radars, 
type  of  aircraft  used,  techniques  employed  (e.g.  cloud  base  seeding  at  3,000 
m  msl),  etc. 

Item  9 — Enter  the  months  of  the  year  to  which  the  report  applies  during  which 
seeding,  etc..  was  carried  out. 

Item  12 — This  item  is  to  permit  the  reporting  person  to  include  any  information 
not  covered  by  item  1  through  11  but  which  he  feels  is  significant  or  of  interest 
such  as  references  to  published  reports  describing  results  of  the  weather  modifi- 
cation operation  or  experiment.  Any  definite  plans  for  a  new  project  during  the 
coming  year  may  be  outlined  under  item  12. 

Item  13 — Please  supply  the  name  and  address  of  agency  to  which  any  request 
for  further  information  should  be  directed. 

Use  a  separate  sheet  of  paper  if  more  space  is  needed. 

Definitions 

As  used  in  the  WMO  Register,  terms  have  the  following  meaning : 
Item  1 — Type  (purpose)  of  weather  modification  activity  or  project:  By  proj- 
ect is  meant  a  related  series  of  weather  modification  activities  having  a  common 
objective.  Will  be  included  any  activity  performed  with  the  intention  of  pro- 
ducing artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  behaviour  or  dynamics  of  the 
atmosphere. 

Item  4 — Location  of  area  in  which  project  is  carried  out :  The  area  referred  to 
includes  both  the  target  area  and  control  area.  By  target  area  is  meant  the 
ground  area  within  which  the  effects  of  the  weather  modification  activity  are 
expected  to  be  found,  and  by  control  area  is  meant  a  preselected,  untreated 
ground  area  used  for  comparison  with  the  target  area. 

Item  8 — Description  of  weather  modification  apparatus,  etc. :  By  weather  modi- 
fication apparatus  is  meant  any  apparatus  used  with  the  intention  of  producing 
artificial  changes  in  the  composition,  behaviour,  or  dynamics  of  the  atmosphere. 
For  example :  seeding  generators,  propane  devices,  flares,  rockets,  artillery  pro- 
jectiles, jet  engines,  etc. 


Appendix  Q 


Report  of  the  World  Meteorological  Organizatiox/United  Na- 
tions Environment  Program  Informal  Meeting  on  Legal  Aspects 
of  Weather  Modification 

World  Meteorological  Organization  and  United  Nations  Environment 
Program,  Geneva,  November  17  to  21,  1975 

1.  organization  of  the  meeting 

J. I    Opening  of  the  meeting 

1.1.1  The  Chairman,  Professor  R.  List,  declared  the  meeting  open  at  10  :00 
a.m.  on  Monday  17  November  1975.  The  list  of  participants  is  reproduced  in  Ap- 
pendix A. 

1.1.2  Mr.  O.  M.  Ashford,  Director  of  Program  Planning  and  UN  Affairs  of 
the  WM()  Secretariat,  welcomed  the  participants  to  the  Headcpiarters  of  WMO  on 
behalf  of  the  Secretary-General,  expressing  appreciation  to  UNEP  for  having 
taken  the  initiative  in  arranging  the  meeting  and  for  providing  support  to  the  par- 
ticipants. He  observed  that  when  the  Seventh  World  Meteorological  Congress  in 
April  1975  decided  to  launch  the  Weather  Modification  Program,  this 
marked  a  considerable  change  in  the  position  of  the  Organization  in  this  respect 
which  was  in  line  with  the  trend  to  give  greater  attention  to  the  broad  socio-eco- 
nomic responsibilities  of  WMO  as  a  specialized  agency  of  the  United  Nations. 
WMO  already  collaborated  with  UNEP  in  some  ten  different  projects,  and  the 
present  meeting  where  persons  from  different  disciplines  could  discuss  together 
topics  of  common  interest  was  a  good  example  of  such  collaboration.  In  conclu- 
sion Mr.  Ashford  gave  a  special  word  of  thanks  to  the  six  experts  nominated  by 
WMO  who  had  agreed  to  come  to  present  on  behalf  of  the  Organization  the  current 
scientific  situation  in  weather  modification. 

1.1.3  Mr.  R.  S.  Mikhail,  Deputy  Director  of  the  Division  of  Geophysics,  Global 
Pollution  and  Health  of  the  UNEP  Secretariat  conveyed  the  greetings  of  the  Ex- 
ecutive Director  of  UNEP  and  expressed  appreciation  to  WMO  for  having  orga- 
nized the  meeting  in  Geneva  and  thanked  the  co-chairman  and  participants  for 
having  come.  He  informed  the  meeting  that  the  Governing  Council  of  UNEP 
in  March  1975  had  agreed  that  the  dialogue  between  WMO  and  UNEP  on  legal 
aspects  of  Weather  Modification  should  continue  since  it  was  essential  that  inter- 
national legal  principles  and  guidelines  should  be  considered  hand  in  hand  with 
the  scientific  advancement  of  the  subject.  Mr.  Mikhail  expressed  the  opinion  that 
if  the  present  state  of  scientific  knowledge  in  the  area  of  weather  modification 
was  not  yet  adequate  to  permit  the  development  of  formal  legal  instruments  for 
the  regulation  of  activities  in  this  area,  it  was  nevertheless  feasible  to  develop 
general  principles  and  operating  guidelines  as  a  first  step  in  that  direction. 

X.%    Adoption  of  tlte  agenda 

1.2.1  The  agenda  as  adopted  as  reproduced  in  Appendix  P>.  List  of  supporting 
paper*  available  at  the  time  of  the  meeting  is  reproduced  in  Appendix  C. 

2.   REVIEW  OF  DEVELOPMENTS  SINCE  THE  THIRD  SESSION  OF  THE  WMO  EXECUTIVE 
COMMITTEE  PANEL  ON  WEATHER  MODIFICATION  IN  NOVEMBER  1974 

2.1  Relevant  decision 8  of  the  third  session  of  the  Governing  Council  of  T'NEP 
2.1.1  The  meeting  was  informed  that  according  to  the  decisions  of  the  Governing 
Council,  the  strategy  of  UNEP  in  respect  of  the  legal  aspects  of  weather  modifi- 
cation is  as  follows  : 

1  ;i  '  Consultations  will  be  continued  towards  development  of  legal  provi- 
sions which  would  define  the  responsibility  of  States  to  ensure  that  weather 
modification  experiments  and  operations  within  their  jurisdiction  or  control 

(728) 


729 


do  not  cause  damage  to  the  environment  of  other  States  or  to  areas  beyond 
the  limits  of  national  jurisdiction  ; 

(b)  The  Executive  Director  will  continue  to  consult  with  WMO  and  other 
scientific  and  legal  experts  as  necessary  on  the  desirability  of  developing 
general  principles  and  operating  guidelines  on  weather  modification  experi- 
ments and  operations.  He  proposes  a  meeting  between  scientists  and  legal  ex- 
perts to  develop  such  principles  and  guidelines.  The  question  of  calling  an  in- 
tergovernmental meeting  to  approve  such  principles  and  guidelines  would  be 
considered  at  a  later  stage,  after  consensus  is  reached  between  scientists  and 
legal  advisers. 

2.2  Relevant  decisions  of  the  seventh  session  of  Congress  and  of  the  twenty- 

seventh  session  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  WMO 
2.2.1  The  Weather  Modification  Program  of  WMO  incorporates  as  its  most  im- 
portant component  a  Precipitation  Enhancement  Project  (PEP)  which  will  be 
an  internationally  planned,  executed  and  evaluated  experiment  in  artificial  pre- 
cipitation stimulation.  The  meeting  was  informed  that  in  Resolution  12  (Cg-VII) 
Congress  had  specifically  asked  the  Executive  Committee  in  developing  the 
plans  for  PEP  to  give  particular  consideration  to  minimizing  any  legal  liability  of 
WMO. 

2.2.2  The  position  of  the  WMO  Congress  was  in  accord  with  that  of  the  UNEP 
Governing  Council  in  that  international  legal  principles  and  guidelines  should 
be  developed  hand  in  hand  with  the  scientific  progress  in  the  field  of  weather  mod- 
ification. Congress  was  of  the  opinion  that  a  better  understanding  of  the  physical 
basis  of  weather  modification  was  needed  before  WMO  would  be  able  to  provide 
definitive  advice  to  Members  on  this  aspect  of  weather  modification  experiments 
or  operations. 

2.2.3  The  meeting  agreed  that  scientific  advancement  in  general  did  not  pro- 
gress smoothly,  but  was  somewhat  erratic  and  even  subject  to  reverses  on  occa- 
sions. It  was  suggested  that  over  a  relatively  short  time  scale  the  keyword  should 
perhaps  be  "in  phase"  rather  than  "hand  in  hand". 

2.3  Relevant  decisions  of  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarmament 

(CCD)  of  the  United  Nations 

2.3.1  The  meeting  noted  with  interest  that  at  the  request  of  the  Conference  of 
the  Commitee  on  Disarmament,  some  experts  had  attended  an  informal  meeting 
in  Geneva  in  order  to  provide  the  Committee  with  scientific  and  technical  back- 
ground information  concerning  weather  modification.  Following  this  scientific 
briefing,  the  representatives  of  the  U.S.A.  and  the  U.S.S.R.  had  submitted  inde- 
pendently an  identical  draft  text  for  a  convention  on  the  prohibition  of  military 
or  any  other  hostile  use  of  environmental  modification  techniques.  The  General 
Assembly  of  the  United  Nations  was  currently  discussing  the  report  of  the  CCD 
and  would  indicate  the  future  action  to  be  taken  on  this  draft. 

2.3.2  The  meeting  was  also  informed  that  it  was  proposed  to  include  a  limita- 
tion on  the  use  of  environmental  warfare  in  the  protocols  to  the  Geneva  Conven- 
tions of  1949  now  under  discussion  in  a  Diplomatic  Conference  on  Humanitarian 
Law  (Geneva). 

3.  REVIEW  OF  THE  STATE  OF  THE  ART  AND  POSSIBLE  DEVELOPMENTS 

3.1    National  laws  related  to  weather  modification 

3.1.1  Professor  Samuels  introduced  this  item  and  drew  attention  to  some  of  the 
difficulties  encountered  in  obtaining  accurate  up-to-date  information,  and  in  com- 
paring different  legal  systems.  After  summarizing  the  principal  control  tech- 
niques and  substantive  rules  as  found  mainly  in  the  special  laws  of  Australia, 
Canada,  South  Africa,  and  the  United  States,  he  recommended  in  particular 
the  establishment  of  an  international  register  of  relevant  national  legislation 
and  the  development  of  a  model  national  law  comprising  certain  essentials  such 
as  registration  and  data  reporting  for  all  weather  and  climate  modification 
activities. 

3.1.2  In  the  ensuing  discussion,  reference  was  made  to  additional  sources  of 
national  law,  including  the  applicable  rules  contained  in  water  legislation  (e.g., 
Peru  1969),  in  natural  resources  legislation  (e.g.  Colombia  1974),  and  in  the 
general  body  of  environmental,  administrative  and  civil  law  (e.g.,  in  the 
U.S.S.R.) .  It  was  pointed  out  that  even  in  those  countries  where  special  legisla- 
tion had  been  enacted,  a  single  statutory  text  normally  could  not  cover  all  rele- 
vant aspects  of  weather  modification. 


730 


3.1.3  There  was  general  agreement  on  the  desirability  of  an  improved  col- 
lection and  mutual  exchange  of  legislative  information,  also  from  an  educational 
point  of  view.  It  was  noted  with  satisfaction  that  WMO  was  initiating  a  register 
of  weather  modification  activities  and  that  the  questionnaire  circulated  to  Mem- 
bers to  obtain  information  for  inclusion  in  the  register  inquired  as  to  the 
existence  of  laws  relating  to  weather  modification  activities  in  the  country 
concerned.  The  meeting  suggested  that  WMO  Members  should  be  invited  to 
supply  full  details  of  such  laws  so  as  to  facilitate  a  complete  compilation  of 
national  laws.  However,  the  meeting  agreed  that  indiscriminate  transfer  of  laws 
from  one  country  to  another  was  not  practicable,  but  that  laws  needed  to  be 
adapted  to  specific  requirements  of  different  legal  and  social  systems. 

3.1.4  In  this  connexion,  reservations  were  expressed  as  to  the  feasibility  of 
technical  assistance  and  expert  advice  by  WMO/UNEP  to  individual  states  on 
legal  aspects  of  weather  modification  at  the  present  stage  of  scientific  knowledge. 
In  particular,  while  legal  rules  on  registration  and  data  reporting  were  generally 
considered  as  beneficial,  premature  rules  on  liability  for  damage  were  viewed 
as  potentially  counter-productive. 

3.2    The  science  of  weather  modification 

3.2.1  The  meeting  agreed  that  the  discussion  would  be  concerned  solely  with 
intentional  weather  modification. 

3.2.2  The  meeting  had  the  opportunity  to  examine  the  official  WMO  state- 
ment released  in  1974  entitled  "Present  state  of  knowledge  and  possible  practical 
benefits  in  some  fields  of  weather  modification"  (see  Appendix  D)  and  also  the 
amplification  of  this  statement  which  had  been  prepared  for  use  by  the  Secretary- 
General  of  WMO. 

3.2.3  It  was  agreed  that  the  statement  and  its  amplification  represented  the 
current  state  of  knowledge  in  the  field  of  weather  modification  ;  the  meeting  noted 
that  the  International  Commission  on  Cloud  Physics  of  the  International  Asso- 
ciation of  Meteorology  and  Atmospheric  Physics  (IAMP)  and  indicated 
satisfaction  at  the  statement  and  at  Weather  Modification  Programs  of  WMO. 
It  was  recalled  that  the  Precipitation  Enhancement  Project  of  WMO  was  de- 
signed to  obtain  further  scientifically  acceptable  information  concerning  the 
feasibility  of  artificial  stimulation  of  precipitation. 

3.2.4  The  meeting  was  informed  that  the  role  of  WMO  at  the  present  time  in 
helping  developing  countries  was  to  give  advice,  on  request,  concerning  proposed 
weather  modification  projects  and  occasionally  to  provide  experts  under  the 
UNDP  to  visit  countries  in  order  to  assess  the  possibilities  of  artificial  precipita- 
tion augmentation.  It  was  hoped  to  arrange  courses  in  weather  modification  and 
to  offer  fellowships  in  these  courses  to  a  certain  number  of  scientists  from 
developing  countries. 

3.2.5  Seventh  Congress  strongly  urged  that  when  a  Member  country  or  a 
group  of  Members  wished  to  conduct  their  own  weather  modification  with  the 
advice  of  WMO,  a  special  WMO  group  of  experts  be  set  up  to  advise  on  the 
planning,  implementation  and  evaluation  of  the  project.  The  high  scientific  stat- 
ure and  independence  of  such  a  group  would  permit  it  to  guide  the  project  along 
sound  scientific  lines  and  thereby  assume  the  greatest  chance  of  success  and 
ultimate  acceptance  of  the  results  by  the  scientific  community.  The  cost  involved 
In  providing  for  a  WMO  group  for  a  special  project  of  this  kind  would  be  borne 
by  the  Member  or  Members  concerned. 

3.2.6  There  was  a  considerable  discussion  on  the  distinction  for  legal  pur- 
poses between  a  weather  modification  experiment  and  an  operation.  It  was  gen- 
erally agreed  that  in  an  experiment  the  major  objective  was  using  scientifically 
acceptable  met  bods  to  obtain  information,  whereas  in  an  operation  the  objective 
\\a-  i.)  influence  the  atmospheric  processes  so  as  to  produce  a  desired  effect,  e.g. 
additional  rainfall.  In  the  latter  case,  a  scientific  evaluation  of  the  intervention 
was  frequently  not  made.  It  was  pointed  out  however  that  for  the  purpose  of 
determination  of  legal  liability  the  distinction  was  irrelevant. 

■l.i    Legal  problems  facing  public  and  private  operators 

3.8.1  Professor  Samuels  introduced  this  agenda  item.  He  suggested  that  the 
key  problem  facing  operators  is  tbe  legal  responsibility  they  may  hear  for  damage 
cans.  , i  by  their  activities.  He  pointed  out  the  difference  between  legal  systems 
ae  regards  tbe  type  of  damage  for  which  compensation  may  be  received,  the 
111  Of  liability  and  tbe  kind  of  proof  required.  He  also  drew  attention  to 
possible  Links  between  an  operator's  liability  and  a  State's  international  respon- 
sibility in  the  event  of  alleged  extended  area  effects. 


731 


3.3.2  After  a  general  discussion  on  the  state  of  international  environmental 
law  and  on  the  recourse  available  in  situations  involving  alleged  trans-frontier 
damage,  the  meeting  briefly  reviewed  past  experience  with  court  litigation  regard- 
ing injunctions  and  liability  for  damage.  Weather  modification  activities,  no 
adverse  effects  of  which  have  been  proved  on  the  basis  of  the  present  state  of 
scientific  knowledge,  were  distinguished  from  other  activities  involving  pollution 
and  other  harmful  effects ;  the  view  was  expressed  that  the  development  of  new 
beneficial  technology  should  not  be  constrained  unduly  by  "Punitive"  legal  sanc- 
tions. Instead,  the  preventive  function  of  administrative  law  was  emphasized, 
especially  in  the  field  of  licensing  procedures  and  mandatory  environmental 
impact  assessment. 

3.3.3  There  followed  a  discussion  on  the  practices  of,  and  available  controls 
over,  private  operators  engaged  in  weather  modification  abroad,  especially  in 
developing  countries.  The  meeting  was  informed  of  the  1973  recommendations 
of  the  WMO  Commission  for  Atmospheric  Sciences,  which  advised  governments 
to  seek  advice  from  WMO  on  this  subject  and  of  the  consequent  decision  of  the 
WMO  Seventh  Congress  authorizing  the  Secretary-General  to  establish  on  re- 
quest a  special  WMO  group  of  experts  to  advise  on  the  planning,  implementation 
and  evaluation  of  projects  where  the  costs  involved  will  be  borne  by  the  Mem- 
ber (s)  concerned.  (See  paragraph  3.2.5  above.) 

4.  DISCUSSION  OF  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  AND  OPERATING  GUIDE- 
LINES FOR  WEATHER  MODIFICATION 

4.1  The  meeting  discussed  in  general  terms  the  scientific,  economic,  ecological, 
sociological  and  political  considerations  which  need  to  be  taken  into  account  in 
the  development  of  general  legal  principles  and  operating  guidelines  for  weather 
modification  activities.  It  then  turned  to  a  discussion  of  the  background  paper 
on  legal  principles  prepared  by  Professors  E.  B.  Weiss  and  J.  W.  Samuels, 
UNBP  legal  experts.  It  was  made  clear  that  the  discussion  was  not  aimed  at 
developing  binding  legal  rules  but  rather  at  developing  proposals  for  general 
principles  to  be  considered  in  the  formulation  of  a  future  legal  regime.  The  legal 
experts  expressed  their  desire  for  the  advice  of  the  scientists  in  the  elaboration 
of  general  legal  principles  and  operating  guidelines.  The  WMO  experts  noted 
that  they  did  not  feel  qualified  to  engage  in  detailed  discussion  of  principles 
which  were  essentially  political  in  spirit. 

4.2  The  first  proposed  principle  which  recognized  the  interest  of  all  mankind 
in  the  weather  was  introduced.  It  was  explained  that  this  legal  concept  was 
employed  in  other  common  resource  areas,  such  as  the  deep  sea-bed  beyond  the 
limits  of  national  jurisdiction.  The  meeting  considered  that  a  proper  formulation 
of  this  principle,  in  this  context,  would  be:  "The  earth's  atmosphere  is  a  part 
of  the  common  heritage  of  mankind". 

It  was  suggested  that  ultimately  any  statement  of  principles  should  be  preceded 
by  a  Preamble  in  which  reference  is  made  to  the  WMO  Statement  on  Weather 
Modification  and  the  uncertainty  of  the  state  of  the  art.  Furthermore,  it  was 
suggested  that  any  commentary  on  this  principle  should  make  reference  to  the 
inextricable  links  between  the  atmosphere  and  other  environmental  spaces,  e.g. 
the  world's  oceans,  which  are  also  part  of  the  common  heritage  of  mankind. 

4.3  Concerning  the  second  proposed  principle  which  called  for  the  limitation 
of  the  use  of  weather  modification  techniques  to  peaceful  purposes,  the  meeting 
was  of  the  opinion  that  the  inclusion  of  the  following  provision  in  the  general 
principles  would  be  useful :  "Any  techniques  developed  to  modify  weather  shall 
be  dedicated  exclusively  to  peaceful  purposes." 

Whereas  the  original  proposals  concerned  weather  and  climate  modification,  on 
the  advice  of  WMO  experts  reference  is  made  only  to  weather  modification. 

4.4  The  third  proposed  principle,  which  concerned  the  gathering  and  exchange 
of  meteorological  information  was  introduced.  It  was  made  clear  that  the  WMO 
Convention  already  calls  for  such  an  exchange.  Bearing  this  in  mind,  the  meeting 
was  of  the  opinion  that  a  useful  formulation  would  be  :  "Further  to  the  continued 
exchange  of  meteorological  and  related  information  in  accordance  with  the 
WMO  Convention,  States  shall  facilitate  the  gathering  and  exchange  of  infor- 
mation on  weather  modification  activities  and  shall  ensure  that  such  information 
is  made  available  to  WMO  and  to  interested  States." 

It  was  noted  that  WMO  already  receives  reports  from  States  on  weather 
modification  activities. 


732 


4.5  The  fourth  proposed  principle  concerned  the  giving  of  prior  notification 
of  prospective  weather  modification  activities  to  interested  States  It  was  ex 
plained  that  "adequate"  and  "timely"  notification  would  help  to  defuse  interna- 
tional tension  arising  from  misinformation  and  speculation  concerning  a  neieh 
hour  s  activities.  "Adequate"  imports  that  the  information  provided  shows  clearlv 
what  will  be  done.  "Timely"  means  that  the  notified  State  is  given  the  time  to 
analyze  the  information  and  consult  with  the  acting  State  before  the  activitv 
is  conducted.  In  discussion,  reference  was  made  to  UN  General  Assemblv  reso 
lutions  3129  (XXVIII)  and  2995  (XXVII)  in  which  the  Assemblv  expressed  its 
consideration  that  the  development  and  management  bv  States  of  shared  natural 
resources  should  be  based  on  a  system  of  information  and  prior  consultation  in 
the  spirit  of  co-operation  and  good  neighbourliness.  It  was  pointed  out  that  the 
I  NEP  Governing  Council  was  of  the  opinion  that  weather  modification  activi- 
ties were  related  to  the  area  of  shared  natural  resources  but  that  a  separate 
development  of  legal  principles  for  weather  modification  is  of  value. 

4.6  The  meeting  discussed  in  considerable  detail  the  problems  inherent  in 
the  formulation  of  a  principle  concerning  notification.  In  particular,  the  meeting 
explored  the  questions  of  how  the  decision  is  made  on  whom  to  notify,  and  what 
would  be  the  mechanics  of  this  notification.  The  WMO  experts  emphasized  the 
limitations  of  the  state  of  the  art  and  the  problems  this  posed  in  suggesting  that 
neighbouring  States  might  be  affected  by  the  weather  modification  activities.  The 
meeting  considered  that  a  useful  wording  of  a  principle  on  notification  would  be  : 
'•States  shall  in  good  faith  give  adequate  and  timely  notification  of  prospective 
major  weather  modification  activities,  within  their  jurisdiction  or  control,  to 
WMO  which  should  transmit  such  notification  to  all  interested  States." 

This  formulation  involves  the  concept  of  "major"  activities.  It  is  only  for  activi- 
ties of  this  significance  that  notification  is  necessary.  Because  there  is  judgment 
involved  in  what  is  "adequate",  "timely"  and  "major",  the  notion  of  "good 
faith"  was  included  to  provide  some  legal  standard  for  the  judgment. 

4.7  The  meeting  turned  to  a  consideration  of  the  possibility  of  requiring 
States  to  undertake  an  assessment  of  the  environmental  impact*  of  an  activity 
before  it  is  conducted.  The  feasibility  of  such  an  assessment  was  questioned.  The 
possibility  of  incorporating  the  concept  in  the  aforementioned  fourth  principle 
was  discussed  and  it  was  pointed  out  that  the  history  of  the  development  of 
national  environmental  legislation  in  several  States  indicated  that  notification 
and  impact  assessment  were  two  separate  requirements,  to  be  dealt  with  as 
distinct  obligations. 

4.8  Whilst  the  meeting  was  unable  to  concur  in  recommending  a  principle 
concerned  with  the  assessment,  of  the  potential  immediate  and  long-term  environ- 
mental effects  of  weather  modification  activities,  the  following  formulation  was 
considered  as  being  useful  for  further  thought :  "States  shall  ensure  that  a  care- 
ful assessment  is  made  of  the  environmental  impact  of  prospective  major  weather 
modification  activities  within  their  jurisdiction  or  control,  and  shall  make  such 
assessments  available  to  WMO  and  all  interested  States". 

4.9  Discussion  then  turned  to  the  possibility  of  prohibiting  certain  weather 
modification  activities  which  offered  the  risk  of  significant  harm,  unless  the  con- 
sent of  all  interested  States  is  obtained.  It  was  pointed  out  that  analogous  limi- 
tation could  be  inferred  from  Recommendation  70  of  the  Stockholm  Declaration 
and  from  UN  General  Assembly  Resolution  2995  (XXVII).  Concern  was  expressed 
that  such  a  legal  principle  was  unnecessary  given  the  state  of  the  art  today  and 
that  express  application  of  the  general  limitations  found  in  the  Stockholm  Dec- 
laration, etc.,  to  the  field  of  weather  modification  was  unwarranted.  The  meeting 
decided  that  such  a  principle  should  be  deferred  for  further  consideration. 

4.10  The  meeting  then  moved  lo  consideration  of  the  possibility  of  requiring 
States  to  monitor  weather  modification  activities  under  their  jurisdiction  and 
control  and  to  make  such  information  available  to  interested  States  and  the 
WMO.  It  was  pointed  out  that  in  several  States  there  was  already  legislation  pro- 
viding for  the  obligation  to  monitor.  The  meaning  of  the  word  "monitor"  was  dis- 
cussed and  it  was  suggested  that  it  imports  the  observance  of  and  recording  of 
information  concerning  the  conduct  and  effects  of  the  activity  during  and  after  its 
undertaking. 

4.11  Although  no  agreement  was  reached  concerning  the  degree  of  monitoring, 
the  meeting  was  of  the  opinion  that  the  followng  formulation  was  valuable  for 
further  consideration:  "States  shall  make  every  effort  to  ensure  that  weather 
modification  activities  within  their  jurisdiction  or  control  are  monitored,  and 


733 


shall  make  such  information  available  to  WMO  and  interested  States  in  accord- 
ance with  Principle  Three". 

4.12  The  possibility  was  considered  of  a  formulation  which  would  apply  Prin- 
ciple 21  of  the  Stockholm  Declaration  to  the  field  of  weather  modification,  namely 
that  States  should  ensure  that  weather  modification  activities  within  their  juris- 
diction or  control  do  not  cause  damage  to  the  environment  of  other  States  or  of 
areas  beyond  the  limits  of  national  jurisdiction.  The  WMO  experts  considered 
that  it  was  premature  to  recommend  such  a  principle  in  view  of  the  present 
limited  state  of  scientific  knowledge. 

4.13  The  meeting  then  moved  to  a  discussion  of  the  possibility  of  a  principle 
calling  for  consultation  between  the  acting  State  and  other  interested  States  in 
order  to  alleviate  points  of  difference  between  the  parties  concerning  proposed 
weather  modification  activities.  The  legal  experts  of  UNEP  pointed  out  that  such 
consultation  can  be  a  useful  means  of  mantaining  friendly  relations  among  States. 
Mention  was  made  of  the  agreement  between  Canada  and  the  United  States  which 
calls  for  such  consultation  in  certain  circumstances. 

4.14  The  meeting  was  of  the  opinion  that  a  principle  imposing  a  duty  on  States 
to  consult  would  not  be  desirable,  but  that  the  following  draft  text  would  be  pref- 
erable :  "It  is  desirable  that  a  State,  in  whose  territory  major  weather  modifica- 
tion activities  are  to  be  undertaken,  should  engage  in  meaningful  and  timely  con- 
sultation with  interested  states  at  their  request,  with  a  view  to  working  out 
mutually  acceptable  arrangements  regarding  the  conduct  of  those  activities". 

The  meeting  made  note  of  the  following  points  in  this  formulation.  Firstly,  it 
concerns  only  "major"  activities.  Secondly  "interested"  States  would  involve  the 
notion  of  legitimate  concern.  Thirdly,  the  consultation  would  be  at  the  request  of 
the  interested  States. 

4.15  The  meeting  turned  to  the  discussion  of  a  possible  principle  recognizing 
the  obligation  of  States  to  compensate  persons  beyond  their  national  frontiers  for 
significant  damage  caused  by  weather  modification  activities  within  their  juris- 
diction. It  was  noted  that  the  state  of  the  art  today  precluded  any  assessment  of 
damage  and  the  WMO  experts  express  the  opinion  that  the  recommendation  of 
any  such  principle  was  premature. 

4.16  The  legal  experts  of  UNEP  were  of  the  opinion  that  it  would  be  useful  to 
include  the  principle  that  States  shall  co-operate  in  the  development  of  a  legal 
regime  for  the  international  regulation  of  weather  modification  activities. 

4.17  In  conclusion,  reference  was  made  to  the  future  possibility  of  national 
legislation  to  implement  any  international  legal  principles  and  operating  guide- 
lines. The  view  was  expressed  that  it  might  be  useful  to  include  in  the  general 
principles  a  provision  that  would  call  on  States  to  adopt  legislation  to  regulate 
weather  modification  activities  at  the  national  level. 

5.  LEGAL  ASPECTS  OF  THE  WMO  PRECIPITATION  ENHANCEMENT  PROJECT 

5.1  In  Resolution  12  (Cg-VII)  the  WMO  Congress,  in  approving  the  Precipita- 
tion Enhancement  Project  (PEP)  as  part  of  the  Weather  Modification  Pro- 
gramme of  WMO  requested  the  Executive  Committee  to  give  particular  considera- 
tion to  minimizing  and  legal  liability  of  WMO. 

5.2  The  meeting  was  informed  that  preliminary  preparations  for  PEP  were 
already  under  way  but  that  the  experiment  itself  would  not  start  for  at  least  two 
years  and  would  toe  of  several  years'  duration. 

5.3  It  was  agreed  that  in  the  implementation  of  PEP  careful  attention  would 
need  to  be  given  to  the  various  legal  aspects  involved  in  any  agreement  between 
WMO  and  the  state  in  which  PEP  will  be  conducted  (for  example  immunity  and 
liability  in  the  case  of  gross  negligence),  and  it  was  suggested  that  advice  from 
legal  experts  be  sought  by  WMO  in  this  respect.  The  meeting  observed  that  con- 
siderable legal  experience  had  been  acquired  by  organizations  in  the  UN  system 
in  conducting  projects  in  many  different  States,  and  that  experience  had  shown 
that  the  time  required  to  draw  up  such  an  agreement  might  amount  to  as  much  as 
a  year. 

6.  ADOPTION  OF  THE  FINAL  REPORT 

The  meeting  was  able  to  approve  the  text  of  the  report  of  items  1  to  4  during 
the  session  and  it  was  agreed  that  the  chairman  and  co-chairman  should  be 
authorized  to  approve  the  remainder  of  the  report  on  behalf  of  the  meeting. 


34-857  O  -  79  -  49 


734 


7.  CLOSING  OF  THE  MEETING 

The  chairman  and  co-chairman  each  thanked  the  participants  for  their  valu- 
able contributions,  and  especially  for  the  great  lengths  to  which  the  legal  and 
scientific  experts  had  gone  in  endeavouring  to  understand  each  other's  point  of 
view.  Appreciation  was  expressed  to  the  authors  of  the  documents  for  the  session 
and  for  the  support  given  by  the  WMO  Secretariat.  The  representatives  of  UNEP 
and  WMO  also  associated  themselves  with  these  remarks.  The  meeting  was 
declared  closed  at  5  :30  p.m.  on  Thursday  20  November  1975. 

WMO/UNEP  Informal  Meeting  on  Legal  Aspects  of  Weather 
Modification,  Geneva,  November  17  to  21,  1975 

list  of  participants 

Experts  nominated  by  UNEP 

J.  W.  Samuels  (Co-Chairman),  A.  C.  Kiss,  M.  Piskotin,  P.  H.  Sand,  and 
E.  Brown  Weiss. 

Representatives  of  UNEP 
R.  S.  Mikhail,  H.  Ahmed,  and  P.  A.  Bliss. 

Experts  nominated  by  WMO 

R.  List  (Chairman),  A.  L.  Alusa,  A.  Gagin,  P.  Goldsmith,  R.  Lavoie,  and  Y. 
Sedunov. 

Representatives  of  WMO 

0.  M.  Ashford,  and  N.  K.  Kljukin. 
WMO  Secretariat 

R.  D.  Bojkov,  E.  Bollay,  and  R.  M.  Perry. 

AGENDA 

1.  Organization  of  the  meeting : 

1.1  Opening  of  the  session. 

1.2  Adoption  of  the  agenda. 

2.  Review  of  developments  since  the  third  session  of  the  WMO  Executive 
Committee  Panel  on  Weather  Modification  in  November  1974  : 

2.1  Relevant  decisions  of  the  third  session  of  the  Governing  Council  of 
UNEP. 

2.2  Relevant  decisions  of  the  seventh  session  of  Congress  and  of  the 
twenty-seventh  session  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  WMO. 

2.3  Relevant  decisions  of  the  Conference  of  the  Committee  on  Disarma- 
ment (CCD)  of  the  United  Nations. 

3.  Review  of  the  State  of  the  Art  and  possible  developments  : 

3.1  National  laws  related  to  weather  modification. 

3.2  The  science  of  weather  modification. 

3.3  Legal  problems  facing  public  and  private  operators. 

4.  Discussion  of  the  development  of  general  principles  and  operating  guide- 
lines for  weather  modification  experiments  and  operations. 

5.  Legal  aspects  of  the  WMO  precipitation  enhancement  project. 

6.  Adoption  of  the  final  report. 

7.  Closing  of  the  meeting. 

list  of  supporting  papers  available  at  the  time  of  the  meeting 
2.1 :  The  decisions  of  UNEP  Governing  Council. 

2.2:  The  decisions  of  Seventh  WMO  Congress  and  twenty-seventh  WMO 
Executive  Committee. 

2.3  :  The  draft-convention  proposed  to  CCD  by  U.S.A.  and  U.S.S.R.  on  21 
August  1975. 

8.3  :  Review  paper  prepared  by  UNEP  consultant  Professor  Samuels. 
8.2  :  Official  WMO  Statement  on  the  present  state  of  knowledge. 
8.8  :  Review  paper  prepared  by  UNEP  consultant  Professor  Samuels. 
4:  Review  paper  prepared  by  UNEP  consultants  Professor  Samuels  and  E. 
Brown  Weiss. 

6 :  WMO  decisions  on  Weather  Modification  Programme  and  Precipitation 

Enhancement  Project. 


Appendix  R 

Text  of  Senate  Resolution  71,  Considered,  Amended,  and  Agri 

to  July  11,  1973 


93d  CONGRESS 
1st  Session 


S.  RES.  71 

[Report  No.  93-270] 


IN  THE  SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

February  22,1973 

Mr.  Pell  (for  himself,  Mr.  Hath,  Mr.  Case,  Mr.  Chuhch,  Mr.  Cranston,  Mr. 
Gravel,  Mr.  Hart,  Mr.  Hoijjngs.  Mr.  Huohes,  Mr.  Humphrey,  Mr.  Javitk, 
Mr.  Kennedy,  Mr.  MuGovern,  Mr.  Mondale,  Mr.  Muskie,  Mr.  Nelson. 
Mr.  Stevenson.  Mr.  Tuxxey,  and  Mr.  Williams)  submitted  tlie  following 
resolution;  which  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations 

Jvne  27  (legislative  day,  June  25),  1973 
Reported  by  Mr.  Pell,  with  amendments 

July  11,1973 
Considered,  amended,  and  agreed  to 


RESOLUTION 

Expressing  the  sense  of  (lie  Semite  that  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment should  seek  the  agreement  of  oilier  governments  to 
a  proposed  treaty  prohibiting  the  use  of  any  environmental 
or  geophysical  modification  activity  as  a  weapon  of  war,  or 
the  carrying  out  of  any  research  or  experimentation  directed 
thereto. 

Whereas  there  is  vast  scientific  potential  for  human  betterment 
through  environmental  and  geophysical  controls;  and 

Whereas  there  is  great  danger  to  the  world  ecological  system  if 
environmental  and  geophysical  modification  activities  are  not 
controlled  or  if  used  indiscriminately;  and 

Whereas  the  development  of  weapons-oriented  environmental 
and  geophysical  modification  activities  will  create  a  threat 
to  peace  and  world  order;  and 

V 


APPENDIX  R 


(735) 


736 
2 

Whereas  the  United  States  Government  should  seek  agreement 
with  other  governments  on  the  complete  cessation  of  any 
research,  experimentation,  or  use  of  any  such  activity  as  a 
weapon  of  war :  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

1  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  the  Senate  that  the 

2  United  States  Government  should  seek  the  agreement  of 

3  other  governments,  including  all  Permanent  Members  of  the 

4  Security  Council  of  the  United  Nations,  to  a  treaty  along  the 

5  following  general  lines  which  will  provide  for  the  complete 
y  cessation  of  any  research,  experimentation,  and  use  of  any 
7  environmental  or  geophysical  modification  activity  as  a 
3  weapon  of  war: 

9  "The  Parties  to  this  Treaty, 

10  "Recognizing  the  vast  scientific  potential  for  human 

H  betterment   through   environmental   and  geophysical 

12  controls, 

13  "Aware  of  the  great  danger  to  the  world  ecological 

14  system  of  uncontrolled  and  indiscriminate  use  of  environ- 

15  menial  and  geophysical  modification  activities, 

1G  "Recognizing  that  the  development  of  wcapons- 

17  oriented  environmental  and  geophysical  modification 

18  techniques  will  create  a  threat  to  peace  and  world  order, 

19  "Proclaiming  as  their  principal  aim  the  achievement 

20  of  an  agreement  on  the  complete  cessation  of  research, 


737 


3 

1  experimentation,  and  use  of  environmental  and  geo- 

2  physical  modification  activities  as  weapons  of  war, 

3  "Have  agreed  as  follows: 

4  "Article  I 

5  "(1)  The  States  Parties  to  this  Treaty  undertake  to 

6  prohibit  and  prevent,  at  any  place,  any  environmental  or 

7  geophysical  modification  activity  as  a  weapon  of  war; 

8  "  (2)  The  prohibition  in  paragraph  1  of  this  article  shall 

9  also  apply  to  any  research  or  experimentation  directed  to 

10  the  development  of  any  such  activity  as  a  weapon  of  war, 

11  but  shall  not  apply  to  any  research,  experimentation,  or  use 

12  for  peaceful  purposes; 

13  "  (3)  The  States  Parties  to  this  Treaty  undertake  not  to 

14  assist,  encourage  or  induce  any  State  to  carry  out  activities 

15  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  of  this  article  and  not  to  partiei- 
](>  pate  in  any  other  way  in  such  actions. 

17  "Article  II 

18  "In  this  Treaty,  the  term  'environmental  or  geophysical 

19  modification  activity'  includes  any  of  the  following  activities: 

20  "(1)  any  weather  modification  activity  which  has 

21  as  a  purpose,  or  has  as  one  of  its  principal  effects,  a 

22  change  in  the  atmospheric  conditions  over  any  part  of 

23  the  earth's  surface,  including,  hut  not  limited  to,  any 

24  activity  designed  to  increase  or  decrease  precipitation, 


738 


4 

1  increase  or  suppress  bail,  lightning,  or  fog,  and  direct 

2  or  divert  storm  systems ; 

3  "(2)  any  climate  modification  activity  which  has 

4  as  a  purpose,  or  has  as  one  of  its  principal  effects,  a 

5  change  in  the  long-term  atmospheric  conditions  over 
G  any  part  of  the  earth's  surface; 

7  "(3)  any  earthquake  modification  activity  which 

8  has  as  a  purpose,  or  has  as  one  of  its  principal  effects, 

9  the  release  of  the  strain  energy  instability  within  the 
10  solid  rock  layers  beneath  the  earth's  crust ; 

n  "(4)  any  ocean  modification  activity  which  has  as 

12  a  purpose,  or  has  as  one  of  its  principal  effects,  a  change 

13  in  the  ocean  currents  or  the  creation  of  a  seismic  dis- 

14  turbance  of  the  ocean  (tidal  wave) . 
ir>  "Article  III 

Hi  "Five  years  after  the  entry  into  force  of  this  Treaty,  a 


17  conference  of  Parties  shall  be  held  at  (ieneva,  Switzerland, 

18  in  order  to  review  the  operation  of  this  Treaty  with  a  view 
1!)  to  assuring  that  the  purposes  of  the  preamble  and  the  pro- 
L»0  visions  of  I  lie  Treaty  are  being  realized.  Such  review  shall 

21  take  into  account  any  relevant  technological  developments 

22  in  order  to  determine  whether  the  definition  in  Article  If 

23  should  be  amended. 

24  "Article  IV 

25  "1.  Any  Party  may  propose  an  amendment  to  this 

26  Treaty.  The  text  of  any  proposed  amendment  shall  be  sub- 


739 


5 

1  mitted  to  the  Depositary  Governments  which  shall  circulate 

2  it  to  all  parties  to  this  Treaty.  Thereafter,  if  requested  to  do 

3  so  hy  one-third  or  more  of  the  Parties,  the  Depositor}'  (Jov- 

4  ernments  shall  convene  a  conference,  to  which  they  shall 

5  invite  all  the  Parties,  to  consider  such  an  amendment. 

6  "2.  Any  amendment  to  this  Treaty  shall  be  approved 

7  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  of  all  the  Parties  to  this  Treaty. 

8  The  amendment  shall  enter  into  force  for  all  Parties  upon  the 

9  deposit  of  instruments  of  ratification  by  a  majority  of  all 

10  the  Parties. 

11  "Article  V 

12  "1.  This  Treaty  shall  be  of  unlimited  duration. 

13  "2.  Each  Party  shall,  in  exercising  its  national  sov- 

14  creignty,  have  the  right  to  withdraw  from  the  Treaty  if  it 
13  decides  that  extraordinary  events,  related  to  the  subject 
1o'  mailer  of  this  Treat}',  have  jeopardized  the  supreme  interests 

17  of  its  country.  It  shall  give  notice  of  such  withdrawal  to  all 

18  olher  Parties  to  the  Treaty  three  months  in  advance. 
V.)  Article  VI 

20  "1.  This  Treaty  shall  be  open  to  all  States  for  signature. 

21  Any  State  which  docs  not  sign  this  Treaty  before  its  entry 

22  into  force  in  accordance  with  paragraph  3  of  this  Article 

23  may  accede  to  it  at  any  time. 

24  "2.  This  Treaty  shall  be  subject  to  ratification  by  sig- 

25  natory  States.  Instruments  of  ratification  and  instruments  of 


740 


6 

1  accession  shall  be  deposited  with  the  Governments  of  the 

2  United  States  of  America,  ,  and 

3  which  are  hereby  designated  the  Depositary  Governments. 

4  "3.  This  Treaty  shall  enter  into  force  after  its  ratifica- 

5  tion  by  the  States,  the  Governments  of  which  are  designated 

6  Depositaries  of  the  Treaty. 

7  "4.  For  States  whose  instruments  of  ratification  or  ac- 

8  cession  are  deposited  subsequent  to  the  entry  into  force  of 

9  this  Treaty,  it  shall  enter  into  force  on  the  date  of  the  de- 

10  posit  of  their  instruments  of  ratification  or  accession. 

11  "5.  The  Depositary  Governments  shall  promptly  inform 

12  all  signatory  and  acceding  States  of  the  date  of  each  signa- 

13  ture,  the  date  of  deposit  of  each  instrument  of  ratification  of 

14  and  accession  to  this  Treaty,  the  date  of  its  entry  into  force, 

15  and  the  date  of  receipt  of  any  requests  for  conferences  or 

16  other  notices. 

17  "6.  This  Treaty  shall  be  registered  by  the  Depositary 

18  Governments  pursuant  to  Article  102  of  the  Charter  of  the 

19  United  Nations." 


Appendix  S 


Reported  Cases  on  Weather  Modification 


Slutsky  v.  City  of  Neiv  York,  197  Misc.  730,  97  N.Y.S.  2d  238  (Sup.  Ct,  1950). 

Southwest  Weather  Research,  Inc.  v.  Rounsaville,  320  S.W.  2d  211  (Tex.  Civ. 
App.,  1958),  and  Southicest  Weather  Research,  Inc.  v.  Duncan,  319  S.W.  2d 
940  (Tex.  Civ.  App.  1958),  both  affd.  sub  nom.  Southwest  Weather  Research,  Inc. 
v.  Jones,  160  Tex.  104,  327  S.W.  2d  417  (1959) . 

Summerville  v.  North  Platte  Valley  Weather  Control  DIM.,  170  Neb.  46,  101 
X.W.  2d  748  (1960). 

Pennsylvania  Natural  Weather  Assn.  v.  Blue  Ridge  Weather  Modification 
Assn.,  44  Pa.  D.  &  C.  2d  749  (1968) . 


(741) 


Appendix  T 

Glossary  of  Selected  Terms  in  Weather  Modification  1 

GLOSSARY  _!/ 


ACRE- FOOT— The  volume  of  water  required  to  cover 
one  acre  to  a  depth  of  one  foot:  43,560  cubic  feet, 
325,852  gallons 

AEROSOL— A  colloidal  system  in  which  the  dispersed 
phase  Is  composed  of  either  solid  or  liquid  particles, 
and  in  which  the  dispersion  medium  is  some  gas. 
usually  air. 

There  is  no  clear-cut  upper  limit  to  the  size  of 
particles  comprising  the  dispersed  phase  in  an  aerosol, 
but  as  in  ail  other  colloidal  systems,  it  is  rather  com- 
monly set  at  1  micron.  Haze,  most  smokes,  and  some 
fogs  and  clouds  may  thus  be  regarded  as  aerosols. 

AIRCRAFT  SEEDING— The  use  of  aircraft  to  dispense 
cloud  seeding  agent*. 

ALTOCUMULUS—  A  principal  type  of  cloud,  8,000  to 
20,000  feet,  consisting  of  a  layer  where  the  denser 
parts  have  modified  cumuliform  characteristics  of 
roundness  and  sharpness  of  outline. 

ALT08TRATU8  —  A  principal  type  of  "middle"  cloud 
(altitude  approx.  8,000  to  20,000  feet),  appearing 
as  a  fairly  uniform  grey  layer  that  often  covers  the 
entire  sky. 

ANVIL  CLOUD— Popular  name  given  to  a  cumulonim 
bus  cloud  whose  upper,  ice-crystal  portion  is  spread 
out  horizontally  to  give  the  appearance  of  an  anvil. 
In  the  International  Cloud  Classification,  this  is  a 
"cumulonimbus  caplllatus"  cloud  with  the  supplemen 
tary  feature  "incus." 

ARTIFICIAL  NUCLEATION  —  Any  process  whereby 
the  nucleation  of  cloud  particles  .s  Initiated  or  accel- 
erated by  human  intervention. 

CAP  CLOUD -An  approximately  stationary  cloud,  on 
or  hovering  above  an  Isolated  mountain  peak.  It  is 
formed  by  the  cooling  and  condensation  of  humid  air 
forced  up  over  the  peak. 

CELLULAR  CONVECTION  —  An  organized,  convecUve. 
fluid  motion  characterized  by  the  presence  of  distinct 
convection  cells  or  convectlve  units,  usually  with  up- 
ward motion  (away  from  the  heat  source)  in  the  cen- 
tral portions  of  the  cell,  and  sinking  or  downward  flow 
in  the  cell's  outer  regions. 

CHAFF— Metallic,  electrical  dipoles,  several  centime- 
ters long,  commonly  made  of  fine  wire. 

The  original  use  of  chaff,  dropping  large  quantities 
of  It  from  aircraft  in  WWII,  was  to  jam  enemy  radars 
It  is  now  used  experimentally  to  alter  the  electrical 
properties  of  thunderstorms. 


CHAFF  SEEDING -The  dispensing  of  chaff  into  a  cu- 
mulonimbus cloud  for  the  experimental  purpose  of 
altering  the  cloud's  electrical  structure  and  hence 
affecting  the  occurrence  and  character  of  lightning. 

It  is  hypothesized  that  the  chaff  is  the  medium  for 
leakage  currents  (through  corona  point  discharges) 
which  forestall  the  development  of  the  charge  centers 
necessary  for  lightning  tormatioa 

CIRRUS  — A  principal  cirriform  cloud  type,  composed  of 
ice  crystals  aggregated  into  delicate  wisps  or  patches 
at  high  altitudes. 

The  term  "cirrus"  is  often  used  as  a  generic  term 
for  ail  cirriform  clouds. 

CLOUD  — A  visible  aggregate  of  minute  water  and/or 
ice  particles  in  the  atmosphere  above  the  earth's 
surface.  Cloud  differs  from  fog  only  In  that  the  latter 
is,  by  definition,  in  contact  with  the  earth's  surface. 

Clouds  form  in  the  free  atmosphere  as  a  result 
of  condensation  of  water  vapor  In  rising  currents  of 
air,  or  by  the  evaporation  of  the  lowest  stratum  of 
fog.  For  condensation  to  occ\ir  at  the  point  of  satura- 
tion or  a  low  degree  of  supersatu  ration,  there  must 
be  an  abundance  of  condensation  nuclei  for  water 
clouds,  or  ice  nuclei  for  ice-crystal  clouds.  The  size  of 
cloud  drops  varies  from  one  cloud  type  to  another, 
and  within  any  given  cloud  there  always  exists  a  fin- 
ite range  of  sizes.  Generally  speaking,  cloud  drops 
range  between  one  and  one  hundred  microns  in  di- 
ameter, and  hence  are  very  much  smaller  than  rain 
drops. 

CLOUD  MICROPHYSICS-A  specialized  field  within 
cloud  physics  dealing  with  extremely  small-scale  phe- 
nomena, particularly  the  molecular-scale  processes  of 
evaporation,  condensation,  and  freezing  of  cloud  par- 
ticles, and  the  complex  Interactions,  Including  elec- 
trical effects,  among  cloud  particles. 

CLOUD  MODEL  —  In  general,  any  idealized  represents 
tkon  of  a  cloud  or  cloud  processes.  Increasingly,  this 
term  is  used  for  mathematical  representations  of  cloud 
processes,  particularly  those  formulated  for  numerical 
solution  on  electronic  computers 

CLOUD  MODIFICATION -Any  process  by  which  the 
natural  course  of  development  of  a  cloud  is  altered  by 
artificial  means. 

CLOUD  PHYSICS -The  body  of  knowledge  concerned 
with  physical  properties  of  clouds  in  the  atmosphere 
and  the  processes  occurring  therein 

CLOUD  SEEDING  —  Any  process  of  injecting  a  sub- 
stance into  a  cloud  for  the  purpose  of  influencing  the 


1  From  Project  Skywater  ;  1973-74  Biennial  Report.  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior. 
Hur»-nu  of  Reclamation.  Division  of  Atmospheric  Water  Resources  Management.  REC-ERC- 
70-21.  Denver,  December  1976.  pp.  A-21  to  A-25. 


(742) 


743 


cloud's  subsequent  development.  Ordinarily,  this  re- 
fers to  the  injection  of  a  nucleating  agent,  but  some- 
times alludes  to  substances  which  do  not  directly 
affect  nudeation  (such  as  carbon  black). 

CLOUD  SEEDING  AGENT- Any  variety  of  substances 
dispensed  for  the  purposes  of  cloud  seeding.  In  addi- 
tion to  the  commonly  used  silver  Iodide  and  dry  ice, 
a  number  of  other  materials  have  been  experimented 
with  for  various  purposes,  for  example:  calcium  chlor- 
ide, urea,  metaldehyde,  chlorosulfonlc  acid,  carbon 
black,  common  salt,  and  water  spray. 

COALESCENCE  —  In  cloud  physics,  the  merging  of  two 
water  drops  into  a  single  larger  drop. 

COALESCENCE  EFFICIENCY -The  fraction  of  all  col 
lis  ions  between  water  drops  of  a  specified  size  which 
result  in  actual  merging  of  the  two  drops  into  a  single 
larger  drop. 

CONDENSATION  — The  physical  process  by  which  a 
vapor  becomes  a  liquid  or  solid;  the  opposite  of  evap- 
oration. In  meteorological  usage,  this  term  is  applied 
only  to  the  transformation  from  vapor  to  liquid;  any 
process  in  which  a  solid  forms  directly  from  Its  vapor 
is  termed  sublimation,  as  is  the  reverse  process. 

CONDENSATION  LEVEL -That  level  in  the  atmos- 
phere at  which  saturation  and  hence  condensation, 
will  occur  in  a  column  of  rising  air.  This  occurs  by 
virtue  of  the  adlabatic  cooling  of  the  air  as  it  rises. 

CONDENSATION  NUCLEUS  —  A  particle,  either  liquid 
or  solid,  upon  which  condensation  of  water  vapor  be- 
gins in  the  atmosphere.  See  nudeation. 

CONTROL  CLOUD— In  doud  seeding  experiments  on 
Individual  douds,  a.  doud  chosen  to  remain  unseeded, 
but  is  otherwise  monitored  as  if  it  had  been,  in  order 
to  provide  data  for  comparison  with  seeded  douds. 

CONVECTION— 1.  In  general,  mass  motions  within  a 
fluid  resulting  in  transport  and  mixing  of  the  proper- 
ties of  that  fluid. 

2.  As  specialized  in  meteorology,  atmospheric  motions 
that  are  predominantly  vertical,  resulting  in  vertical 
transport  and  mixing  of  atmospheric  properties. 

CONVECTION  CURRENT  — (or  convective  current) 
Any  current  of  air  involved  in  convection.  In  meteor- 
ology, this  Is  usually  applied  to  the  upward  moving 
portion  of  a  convection  circulation,  such  as  a  thermal 
or  the  updraft  In  cumulus  douds. 

CUMULI  FORM  -  Llxe  cumulus;  generally  descriptive  of 
all  douds,  the  principal  characteristic  of  which  Is  ver- 
tical development  In  the  form  of  rising  mounds,  domes, 
or  towers. 


CUMULONIMBUS— ( Commonly  called  thundercloud, 
thunderhead,  thunderstorm.)  A  principal  doud  type, 
the  ultimate  stage  of  development  of  cumulus  or  con- 
vective douds.  They  are  very  dense  and  very  talL 
commonly  5  to  10  miles  In  diameter  and  sometimes 
reaching  a  height  of  12  miles  or  more.  The  upper 
portion  Is  at  least  partly  composed  of  ice  crystals, 
and  often  takes  the  form  of  an  anvil  ("Incus")  or 
vast  plume  The  base  of  the  doud  Is  Invariably  dark 
and  often  accompanied  by  low,  ragged  douds. 

CUMULUS  —  A  principal  doud  type,  actually  a  doud 
"family"  all  of  which  are  characterized  by  vertical 
development;  a  convective  doud. 

DEFTV88ION  —  In  meteorology,  the  exchange  of  fluid 
parcels  (and  hence  the  transport  of  conservative  prop 
erties  between  regions  In  space.  In  the  apparently 
random  motions  of  a  scale  too  small  to  be  treated  by 
the  equations  of  motion. 

In  meteorology,  the  diffusion  of  momentum  (vis- 
cosity), vortlclty,  water  vapor,  heat  (conduction), 
particulate  matter,  and  gaseous  components  of  the 
atmospheric  mixture,  have  been  studied  extensively. 
The  atmospheric  motions  diffusing  these  properties 
may  in  many  cases  be  of  much  larger  scale  than  the 
molecular,  the  exchanging  parcels  being  called  eddies, 
and  the  diffusion  equation  extended  by  analogy  to 
turbulent  diffusion 

DOPPLER  EFFECT— (Also  called  Doppler  shift)  The 
change  In  frequency  with  which  energy  reaches  a 
receiver  when  the  receiver  and  the  energy  source  are 
in  motion  relative  to  each  other. 

DOPPLER  RADAR— A  radar  which  detects  and  inter 
pre  is  the  Doppler  effect  in  terms  of  the  radial  velocity 
of  a  target  The  signal  received  by  a  radar  from  a 
moving  target  differs  slightly  In  frequency  from  the 
transmitted  wave. 

Doppler  radar  la  widely  used  In  doud  studies 
because  it  enables  the  deduction  of  the  motions  of 
doud  and  precipitation  partides. 

DRY-ICE- Solid  carbon  dioxide  (CO2).  It  evaporates 
directly  from  solid  to  gas  at  a  temperature  of  -78. 5*  C 

DRY-ICE  SEEDING  — The  dispensing  of  dry-ice  pellets 
Into  supercooled  douds  for  the  purpose  of  transform 
Ing  the  supercooled  droplets  Into  ice  crystals,  which 
then  grow  and  fall  out  Dry  ice  creates  a  sufficiently 
cold  environment  around  the  droplet*  for  them  to 
undergo  spontaneous  nudeation 

ECHO— In  radar,  a  general  term  for  the  appearance, 
on  a  radar  Indicator,  of  the  radio  energy  returned 
from  a  target  More  explicitly,  It  refers  to  the  energy 
reflected  or  scattered  back  from  a  target 


744 


FREEZING  NUCLEUS  —  Any  particle  which,  when  pre 
sent  within  a  mass  of  supercooled  water,  will  Initiate 
growth  of  an  Ice  crystal  about  itself  (see  nudeatlon). 

GLACIATION—  In  cloud  physics,  the  transformation  of 
cloud  particles  from  water  drops  to  ice  crystals 

GROUND  GENERATOR— In  weather  modification,  al 
most  invanabh  referring  to  silver  iodide  smoke  gen 
erat/>rs  that  are  operated  on  the  ground  (as  opposed 
to  airborne  equipment). 

HAIL  SUPPRESSION  —  Any  method  of  reducing  the 
damaging  effects  of  hailstorms  by  operating  on  the 
hail  producing  cloud. 

The  currently  prevailing  hypothesis  is  that  silver 
iodide  seeding  provides  more  hailstone  nuclei  (and,  at 
the  same  time,  reduces  the  amount  of  supercooled 
water  available  to  build  up  large  hailstones)  with  the 
net  effect  that  the  hail  that  reaches  the  ground  Is 
smaller  and  less  damaging,  and  also  has  a  higher 
probability  of  melting  before  reaching  the  ground 

HYGROSCOPIC  NUCLEI  —  Condensation  nuclei  com 
posed  of  salts  which  yield  aqueous  solution.,  of  a  very 
low  equilibrium  vapor  pressure  compared  with  that  of 
pure  water  at  the  same  temperature.  Condensation 
of  hygroscopic  nuclei  may  begin  at  a  relative  humidity 
much  lower  than  100  percent  (about  75  percent  for 
sodium  chloride),  while  on  so-called  non- hygroscopic 
nuclei,  which  merely  furnish  sufficiently  large  (by 
molecular  standards  )  wettable  surfaces,  relative  hu- 
midities of  nearly  100  percent  are  required.  "Damp 
haze"  is  formed  of  hygroscopic  particles  In  the  process 
of  slow  growth  in  relatively  dry  air 

HYGROSCOPIC  SEEDING -Cloud  seeding  with  hygro 
scopic  material  which  encourages  condensation  and 
collect*  water  vapor 

ICE  CRYSTAL— Any  one  of  a  number  of  macroscopic 
crystalline  forms  In  which  ice  appears,  Including  hex 
agonal  columns,  hexagonal  platelet*,  dendritic  cry 
stals,  ice  needles,  and  combinations  of  these  forms 

I  IE  CRYSTAL  CLOUD- A  cloud  consisting  entirely  of 
ice  crystals  (such  as  cirrus);  to  be  distinguished  in 
this  sense  from  water  clouds  and  mixed  clouds 

ICE  NUCLEUS  -  Any  particle  which  serve*  as  a  nucleus 
in  the  formation  of  ice  crystals  In  the  atmosphere, 
used  without  regard  to  the  particular  physical  process 

involved  in  the  nucleation. 

Due  to  an  apparent  scarcity  of  natural  ice  nuclei 
(or.  at  least,  freezing  nuclei)  in  the  atmosphere,  cloud 
-eeding  with  ice- nucleating  agents  become*  a  practi 
cal  endeavor  Both  sliver  iodide  and  dry  ice  perform 
the  function  of  nucleating  ice  in  an  aggregate  of  su 
percooled  water  droplet* 


ICE- PHASE  SEEDING -Cloud  seeding  with  an  agent 
which  serves  as  an  artificial  ice  nucleus. 

ISOHYET  — A  line  drawn  on  a  map  connecting  geo 
graphical  points  having  equal  amounts  of  precipitation 
during  a  given  time  period,  or  for  a  particular  storm 

LIQUID  WATER  CONTENT  —  ( Abbreviated  LWC.  (The 
amount  of  liquid  water  (that  is,  not  counting  water 
vapor)  in  a  cloud,  usually  expressed  as  grams  of 
water  per  cubic  meter  of  cloud  volume. 

MESO-SCALE— In  meteorology:  having  characteristic 
spatial  dimensions  somewhere  between  1  and  100 
miles,  usually  implying  between  5  and  50  miles. 

NUCLEATING  AGENT  — (or  nucleant)  In  cloud  phy- 
sics, any  substance  that  serves  to  accelerate  the  nu 
cleation  of  cloud  particles  Nucleating  agents  may 
themselves  be  nuclei  (silver  iodide,  salt,  sulfur  di 
oxide,  dust )  or  they  may  enhance  the  nucleation  en- 
vironment (dry,  ice,  propane  spray  ). 

NUCLEATION  — Any  process  by  which  the  phase 
change  of  a  substance  to  a  more  condensed  state 
(condensation,  sublimation,  freezing)  is  initiated  at 
certain  loci  (see  nucleus  i  within  the  less  condensed 
state. 

A  number  of  types  of  nucleation  are  of  interest 
The  process  by  which  condensation  nuclei  initiate  the 
phase  change  from  vapor  to  liquid  is  of  decisive  im- 
portance in  analyses  of  all  cloud  formation  problems. 
The  physical  nature  of  freezing  nuclei  which  may  be 
responsible  for  the  conversion  of  drops  of  supercooled 
water  into  ice  crystals  is  critically  important  in  pre- 
cipitation theory,  us  is  also  the  clarification  of  the  role 
of  spontaneous  nucleation  near  -40*C  The  impor 
tance  of  sublimation  nuclei  is  promoting  the  growth  of 
ice  crystals  directly  from  the  vapor  phase  is  doubtful 

NUCLEUS  —  In  physical  meteorology,  u  purticle  of  any 
nature  upon  which,  or  the  locus  at  which,  molecules 
of  water  or  ice  accumulate  as  a  result  of  a  phase 
change  to  a  more  condensed  state;  an  agent  of  nu 
cleation. 

NUCLEUS  COUNTER -Any  of  severul  devices  for  de 
termining  the  number  of  condensation  nuclei  or  ice 
nuclei  in  a  sample  of  air. 

NUMERICAL  MODEL— In  meteorology,  a  mathemati 
cal  formulation  of  atmospheric  processes  constructed 
so  that  the  dynamical  and  thcrmodynamical  equations 
of  atmospheric  motion  can  be  solved  by  numerical 
methods  on  electronic  computers 

OROGRAPHIC  CLOUD- A  cloud  whose  lorrn  and  c\ 
tent  is  determined  by  the  disturbing  effects  ■>(  imi 
graph>.  mountains,  upon  the  passing  flow  of  ,ur  Me 


745 


cause  these  clouds  are  linked  with  the  form  of  the 
terrestrial  relief,  they  generaJly  move  very  slowly,  If 
at  all,  although  the  winds  at  the  same  level  may  be 
very  strong. 

OROGRAPHIC  LIFTING -The  lifting  of  an  air  current 
caused  by  its  passage  up  and  over  mountains 

OVERSEEDING  —  Cloud  seeding  in  which  an  excess  of 
nucleating  material  is  released.  As  the  term  is  nor 
mally  used,  the  excess  Is  relative  to  that  amount  of 
nucleating  material  which  would,  theoretically,  maxi- 
mize the  precipitation  received  at  the  ground.  In 
seeding  a  supercooled  cloud  with  dry  ice  or  silver 
iodide,  addition  of  too  much  seeding  material  may 
create  so  many  ice  crystals  that  none  can  grow  to  a 
size  large  enough  to  fall  out  of  the  updraft  sustaining 
the  cloud. 

PLUME— The  volume  of  air  space  containing  any  of  the 
substance  emitted  from  a  point  source. 

PRECIPITATION -Any  or  all  of  the  forms  of  water 
particles,  whether  liquid  or  solid,  that  fall  from  the 
atmosphere  and  reach  the  ground 

PRECIPITATION  ECHO -A  Type  of  radar  echo  re 
turned  by  precipitation 

PRECIPITATION  EFFICIENCY  — For  a  given  cloud  or 
storm  system,  the  ratio  of  the  amount  of  precipitation 
actually  produced  to  the  maximum  amount  theoreti- 
cally possible  by  that  system. 

PRECIPITATION  GAGE -General  term  for  any  device 
that  measures  the  amount  of  precipitation;  princi- 
pally, a  rain  gage  or  snow  gage 

PYROTECHNIC  GENERATOR -A  type  of  silver  iodide 
smoke  generator  in  which  th^silver  iodide  forms  as 
a  part  of  the  pyrotechnic  fuel  mbtture.  A  great  flexi 
bility  of  design  is  possible  with  these  generators,  and 
they  are  capable  of  an  extremely  high  output  of 
silver- iodide  nuclei. 

RADIOSONDE- A  balloon  borne  instrument  for  the 
simultaneous  measurement  and  transmission  of  mete- 
orological data. 

RAIN  MAKING -Popular  and  general  term  for  all 
weather  modification  effort  aimed  at  increasing  pre- 
cipitation. 

RANDOM  — Eluding  precise  prediction,  completely  Ir- 
regular. In  connection  with  probability  and  statistics, 
the  term  random  Implies  collective  or  long-run  regu- 
larity; thus  a  long  record  of  the  behavior  of  a  random 
phenomenon  presumably  gives  a  fair  indication  of  Its 
general  behavior  in  another  long  record,  although  the 
individual  observations  have  no  discernible  system  of 
progression 


RANDOMIZE  — To  make  random.  Specifically,  in  weath 
er  modification  contexts,  It  refers  to  the  design  of 
experiments  and  projects  In  such  a  way  as  to  mini 
mlze  the  sources  of  bias  in  the  evaluation  of  results 
by  dictating  that  "seed"  or  "don't  seed"  decisions 
(for  example)  be  made  on  a  purely  random  basis 
If  the  total  number  of  such  decisions  Is  sufficient, ■, 
large,  this  procedure  ensures  that  a  comparison  of 
"seed"  versus  "don't  seed"  results  contains  minimal 
bias. 

REAL-TIME  — Nearly  Instantaneous. 

SALT  NUCLEUS  — A  minute  salt  particle  serving  as  a 
condensation  nucleus. 

SALT  SEEDING  —  Cloud  seeding  with  salt  particles,  a 
technique  that  has  been  applied  to  warm  (non-super 
cooled)  clouds  and  fog  on  the  principle  that  the  hy 
groscopic  droplets  of  salt  solution  will  grow  at  the 
expense  of  other  particles. 

SEEDING  RATE  — The  quantity  of  seeding  agent  (in 
grams  or  kilograms)  released  either  per  unit  of  time 
(if  applied  to  ground-based  generators)  or  per  unit 
of  distance  (traveled  by  an  aircraft)  used  in  cloud 
seeding. 

SILVER  IODIDE  — (Chemical  formula:  Agl. )  The  com 
pound  of  silver  and  iodine  whose  crystalline  structure 
very  closely  approximates  that  of  Ice-crystals. 

SILVER-IODIDE  GENERATOR- Any  of  several  de 
vices  used  to  generate  a  smoke  of  silver-iodide  cry 
staJs  Most  burn  an  acetone  solution  of  silver  iodide; 
the  other  Important  (and  newer)  category  is  that 
of  pyrotechnic  generators. 

SILVER-IODIDE  SEEDING  — The  world-wide  "work- 
horse" method  of  cloud  seeding,  where,  by  any  of 
several  techniques,  silver- Iodide  crystals  are  intro 
duced  into  the  supercooled  portions  of  clouds  to  induce 
the  nucleation  of  Ice  crystals. 

SNOW  COURSE -An  established  line,  usually  from 
several  hundred  feet  to  as  much  as  a  mile  long, 
traversing  representative  terrain  in  a  mountainous 
region  of  appreciable  snow  accumulation  Along  this 
course  instruments  (such  as  snow  stakes,  radioactive 
snow  gages)  are  installed,  and/or  core  samples  of  the 
snow  cover  are  periodically  taken  and  averaged  to 
obtain  a  measure  of  Its  water  equivalent 

STRATOCUMULUS-A  principal,  low-altitude,  cloud 
type,  consisting  of  a  layer  of  rounded  or  roll  shaped 
elements  which  may  or  may  not  be  merged  and  which 
usually  are  arranged  in  orderly  flies  or  a  wave  pat 
tern. 

SUBLIMATION  — The  transition  of  a  substance  from 
the  solid  phase  directly  to  the  vapor  phase,  or  vice 


746 


versa,  without  puitng  through  an  intermediate  liquid 
phase. 

SUPERCOOLING  —  The  reduction  of  temperature  of  any 
liquid  below  the  melting  point  of  that  substance's 
eolld  phase;  that  Is,  cooling  beyond  its  nominal  freez- 
ing point  A  liquid  may  be  supercooled  to  varying 
degrees,  depending  upon  the  relative  lack  of  freezing 
nuclei  or  solid  boundary  irregularities  within  its  en- 
vironment, and  freedom  from  agitation. 

SYNOPTIC— In  general,  pertaining  to  or  affording  an 
overall  view. 

In  meteorology,  this  term  has  become  somewhat 
specialized  in  referring  to  the  use  of  meteorological 
data  obtained  simultaneously  over  a  aide  area  for  the 
purpose  of  presenting  a  comprehensive  and  nearly 
Instantaneous  picture  of  the  state  of  the  atmosphere. 
Thus,  to  a  meteorologist,  "synoptic."  takes  on  the 
additional  connotation  of  simultaneity. 

TARGET  AREA  — la  a  weather  modification  project, 
the  area  within  which  the  effects  of  the  weather  mod- 
ification effort  are  expected  to  be  found 

TRACER— An  easily  detectable  substance  injected  into 
the  atmosphere  for  the  purpose  of  subsequent  mea- 
surement and  reconstruction  of  Its  history-  (trajectory, 
diffusion,  etc ) 

TRAJECTORY— (Or  path,  t  A  curve  in  space  tracing 
the  points  successively  occupied  by  a  particle  in  mo- 
tion. At  any  given  Instant  the  velocity  vector  of  the 
particle  Is  tangent  to  the  trajectory. 

WARM  CLOUD— In  weather  modification  terminology, 
a  water  doud  that  is  not  a  supercooled  cloud  La, 
that  exists  entirely  at  temperatures  above  0*C. 

WATER  EQUIVALENT— The  depth  of  water  that  would 
result  from  the  melting  of  the  snowpack  or  of  a  snow 
sample. 

WATER  VAPOR— (Also  called  aqueous  vapor,  mois 
tore.)  Water  substance  In  vapor  form:  one  of  the 
most  Important  of  all  constituents  of  the  atmosphere. 

WEATHER  MODIFICATION — The  Intentional  or  In- 
advertent alteration  of  weather  by  human  agency. 

WEATHER  RADAR -Generally,  any  radar  which  Is 
suitable  or  can  be  used  for  the  detection  of  precipi- 
tation or  clouds. 


o 


3  1262  09118  6238